Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program - N/A Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires organizations to prepare a schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA), which includes total federal awards expended, as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Condition - Expenditures incurred for the year ended September 30, 2024 were charged to various federal programs and were not reported on the SEFA for the year ended September 30, 2024. Context - The controls in place to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the SEFA were not operating as designed. As a result, $327,215 of expenditures of federal awards was not reported on the SEFA. These missing expenditures did not relate to major programs. Cause and Effect - The lack of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial records and lack of a review of the SEFA could result in an inaccurate SEFA and potentially impact major program determinations. Recommendation - We recommend the Board implement a process to ensure completion and timely review of a proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements prior to commencement of the audit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Management will document a formal control to ensure proper reconciliation of the SEFA to the financial statements. The control will include the following: A report in substantially the same form as the annual SEFA will be developed at least quarterly and will include a reconciliation of grants receivable activity. Meetings will be held at least quarterly to review grant activity, including the aforementioned report, and assess impacts to the financial statements. These meetings will be conducted by treasury and accounting staff, and evidence of document review will be maintained. A centralized repository of information pertaining to federal grants activity will be maintained to ensure timely access to grant and expenditure data for relevant staff.
Assistance Listing, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 66.818, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Brownfields Assessment and Cleanup Cooperative Agreements; 21.027, U.S. Department of the Treasury, COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Award Identification Number and Year - ALN 21.027 SLFRP0127 Pass through Entity - ALN 21.027 - State of Michigan Finding Type - Material weakness Repeat Finding - Yes 2023-002 Criteria - The Single Audit Act and Uniform Guidance require a nonfederal entity that expends $750,000 or more of federal awards in a fiscal year to have a single or program-specific audit. 2 CFR §200.508 (b) indicates that the auditee must prepare financial statements, including the schedule of expenditures of federal awards in accordance with 2 CFR §200.510. Additionally, 2 CFR §200.502 describes the basis for determining the timing of when federal awards are deemed expended and, therefore, reportable on the schedule. Condition - The schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA) was not accurate. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2024, the City expended approximately $2,831,000 of federal funding. The initial draft of the SEFA included the following inaccuracies: ALN 66.818 - The expenditures reported on the SEFA were understated by $148,474. ALN 21.027 - The expenditures reported on the SEFA were overstated by $2,078,221. The SEFA was also ovestated by $116,625 related to a non federal program. The errors noted above have been corrected on the SEFA as of September 30, 2024. Cause and Effect - Controls in place did not ensure the SEFA was complete and accurate for the fiscal period under audit. The errors resulted in the overstatement of federal expenditures. Recommendation - We recommend the City implement a process to ensure that the SEFA is complete and accurate. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions - The City will review its process for identifying and communicating federal grant expenditures to its auditors.
Assistance Listing, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 66.818, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Brownfields Assessment and Cleanup Cooperative Agreements; 21.027, U.S. Department of the Treasury, COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Award Identification Number and Year - ALN 21.027 SLFRP0127 Pass through Entity - ALN 21.027 - State of Michigan Finding Type - Material weakness Repeat Finding - Yes 2023-002 Criteria - The Single Audit Act and Uniform Guidance require a nonfederal entity that expends $750,000 or more of federal awards in a fiscal year to have a single or program-specific audit. 2 CFR §200.508 (b) indicates that the auditee must prepare financial statements, including the schedule of expenditures of federal awards in accordance with 2 CFR §200.510. Additionally, 2 CFR §200.502 describes the basis for determining the timing of when federal awards are deemed expended and, therefore, reportable on the schedule. Condition - The schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA) was not accurate. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - During the fiscal year ended September 30, 2024, the City expended approximately $2,831,000 of federal funding. The initial draft of the SEFA included the following inaccuracies: ALN 66.818 - The expenditures reported on the SEFA were understated by $148,474. ALN 21.027 - The expenditures reported on the SEFA were overstated by $2,078,221. The SEFA was also ovestated by $116,625 related to a non federal program. The errors noted above have been corrected on the SEFA as of September 30, 2024. Cause and Effect - Controls in place did not ensure the SEFA was complete and accurate for the fiscal period under audit. The errors resulted in the overstatement of federal expenditures. Recommendation - We recommend the City implement a process to ensure that the SEFA is complete and accurate. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions - The City will review its process for identifying and communicating federal grant expenditures to its auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.
Internal Controls over Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Award Program: All Awards Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, £200.508(b) The auditee must prepare appropriate statements including an accurate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in accordance with £200.510, Financial Statements. Condition and Context: Audit procedures noted several errors in the client provided SEFA. Cause: Insufficient training and internal controls over the preparation and review process for the SEFA. Effect: The following errors were noted and corrected as a result of auditing procedures on the SEFA: • The Intermediary Relending Program and Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Relending Program awards loan expenditures were calculated incorrectly by including the repayments and excluding the loan service income. • The CFDA #11.037 and #11.419 were not grouped with the correct Federal Grantor. • The STEM Education award had 2 CFDA #’s provided on one line. • There were multiple Federal Grantor and Program Titles that were mislabeled. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should seek appropriate training for the fiscal department on preparation of the SEFA standards. In addition, review processes over the SEFA should be strengthened. Management should consider contracting with an experienced accounting consultant should they identify areas that require additional expertise and review after the drafting of the SEFA and prior to the submission for audit. Management should also ensure that they obtain the complete and full agreements from grantors that are signed by all parties and that clearly identify the funding source. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management attempted to contract with multiple accounting consultants for creating the SEFA but they were already at full capacity and were not available to assist with the creation of the report. When the relevant contract or grant award did not include the necessary information, SCEC management and program staff reached out to our contracting agencies to confirm whether federal funds were part of each award and to find out CFDA numbers and other contract information necessary to complete the form. Nevertheless, there were several errors that in the SEFA submitted to our auditors for review. For the two IRP and RMAP lending programs, the prior year balances were carried over into the FY 24 SEFA through a clerical error. The errors in item 11.037 and 11.419 are related to information we received from the contracting agency. In particular, 11.037 was listed under US Economic Development Administration according to the contracting agency and we were given the description of Economic Adjustment Assistance. The description for 11.419 was given to SCEC by the contracting agency as CDS – Congressionally Directed Spending. Finally, we provided two CFDA’s for the STEM Education award with the submission of the SEFA as we were waiting for confirmation from Program Managers about the correct CDFA numbers. The auditors were informed that we were waiting for these numbers when the SEFA was submitted. In FY24, SCEC had 29 different federal funding sources, from 14 different agencies. We are working to improve our capacity to report these awards without error before the review of our auditors.