FINDING 2024-003 Subject: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): SLFRP1096 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Audit Finding: Material Weakness INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 CITY OF ANDERSON SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context Subrecipients associated with the City's Non-profit, Affordable Housing, and Homeless Initiatives activities funded by the COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds were required to submit reports on program activities either quarterly or monthly. The City did not have adequate internal controls in place designed to ensure that these reports were reviewed. Responsibility for reviewing these reports rested primarily with one employee. For two of three subrecipients tested, we were not able to determine that there was a second employee involved that would ensure that the reports submitted by the subrecipients were reviewed by the City. The lack of internal controls was a systemic issue throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.332 states: "All pass-through entities must: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and include the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward notification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) Federal award identification. (i) Subrecipient name (which must match the name associated with its unique entity identifier); (ii) Subrecipient's unique entity identifier; (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date (see the definition of Federal award date in § 200.1 of this part) of award to the recipient by the Federal agency; (v) Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 CITY OF ANDERSON SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (vi) Subaward Budget Period Start and End Date; (vii) Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient; (viii) Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient by the passthrough entity including the current financial obligation; (ix) Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the passthrough entity; (x) Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); (xi) Name of Federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the Pass-through entity; (xii) Assistance Listings number and Title; the pass-through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the Assistance Listings Number at time of disbursement; (xiii) Identification of whether the award is R&D; and (xiv) Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged) per § 200.414. (2) All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; (3) Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports. (4) (i) An approved federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal Government. If no approved rate exists, the passthrough entity must determine the appropriate rate in collaboration with the subrecipient, which is either: (A) The negotiated indirect cost rate between the pass-through entity and the subrecipient; which can be based on a prior negotiated rate between a different PTE and the same subrecipient. If basing the rate on a previously negotiated rate, the pass through entity is not required to collect information justifying this rate, but may elect to do so; (B) The de minimis indirect cost rate. (ii) The pass-through entity must not require use of a de minimis indirect cost rate if the subrecipient has a Federally approved rate. Subrecipients can elect to use the cost allocation method to account for indirect costs in accordance with § 200.405(d). INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 CITY OF ANDERSON SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass-through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient's records and financial statements as necessary for the pass-through entity to meet the requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. . . . (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). (c) Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 22 CITY OF ANDERSON SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. (e) Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient (as described in paragraph (b) of this section), the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: (1) Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program related matters; and (2) Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations. (3) Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient's audits, on-site reviews, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity's own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in § 200.339 of this part and in program regulations." Cause A system of internal controls to include oversite and review of the quarterly or monthly reports prepared by the subrecipients was not in place. One individual was primarily responsible for reviewing the subrecipient reports. Effect Not having procedures in place for oversite and review of the monitoring reports could lead to noncompliance with the requirements for subrecipient monitoring. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the City. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 23 CITY OF ANDERSON SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the City establish a proper system of internal controls to include oversite and review to ensure that the subrecipient report reviews are reviewed/approved by a second party. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Finding Number: 2024-008 Prior Year Finding Number: 2023-015 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Program: U.S. Department of the Treasury COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN: 21.027 Award #: N/A Award Year: 10/01/2021 – 09/20/2024 Government Department/Agency: Office of the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice (DMPSJ); Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement (ONSE) Criteria - The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In accordance with the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) Requirements for Pass-Through Entities requires that pass-through entities must: Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes certain information outlined in the section noted above, pre-award assessment, indirect cost rated for the award, assistance listing number, finding and award follow-up and other pertinent actions. In accordance with the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.332 Requirements for Pass-Through Entities requires that pass-through entities Verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified in accordance with Section 180.300. Verification methods are provided in Section 180.300, which include confirming in SAM.gov that a potential subrecipient is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from receiving Federal funds. In accordance with the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.332(e) Requirements for Pass-Through Entities requires that pass-through entities must: Monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: • Review financial and performance reports • Ensure that the subrecipient takes corrective action on all significant developments that negatively affect the subaward. Significant developments include Single Audit findings related to the subaward, other audit findings, site visits, and written notifications from a subrecipient of adverse conditions which will impact their ability to meet the milestones or the objectives of a subaward. When significant developments negatively impact the subaward, a subrecipient must provide the pass-through entity with information on their plan for corrective action and any assistance needed to resolve the situation. • Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by Section 200.521. • Resolve audit findings specifically related to the subaward. However, the pass-through entity is not responsible for resolving cross-cutting audit findings that apply to the subaward and other Federal awards or subawards. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report and has not been excluded from receiving Federal funding (meaning, has not been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant agency for audit or oversight agency for audit to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting audit findings in accordance with section Section 200.513(a)(4)(viii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition – The program’s documented subrecipient monitoring requirements includes risk assessments, monitoring of subrecipients and the submission and review of monthly financial and performance reports. During our testing of the subrecipient’s compliance requirements, we noted the following issues: • Our testing of the program’s subrecipient monitoring requirements includes submission and review of monthly financial and performance reports. We noted for one (1) out of 17 samples, the subrecipient failed to submit their monthly financial and performance reports. • For one (1) out of 17 samples, the agency had no evidence to support it had performed the mandatory follow up on reported audit findings in the subrecipient’s audit report for the Corrective Action taken by the subrecipient to remediate the finding. • For one (1) out of 17 samples, the agency had no evidence that a debarment check was performed before the contract was entered into. The agency’s documented policies and the procurement procedures mandate a debarment check before entering into new contracts. Questioned Costs – Not determinable. Context – This is a condition identified per review of various District agencies’ compliance with specified monitoring requirements on the program’s subrecipients using a statistically valid sample. Effect – Subrecipients may not be properly monitored, which may result in subawards being used for unauthorized purposes in violation of the terms and conditions of the subawards or that the subaward performance goals were not achieved. Cause – There is lack of sufficient documentary evidence to support that the controls are operating as designed related to subrecipient monitoring compliance. Recommendation – We recommend that the agencies maintain sufficient documentation to evidence its internal controls over the risk assessment and monitoring of subrecipients. Related Noncompliance – Noncompliance. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions – While DMPSJ doesn’t agree that it is out of compliance, DMPSJ will ensure documentation is maintained regarding its oversight of grant management. ONSE acknowledges and accepts the finding that the subrecipient failed to submit their monthly and performance reports. The District’s corrective action is described in the Management’s Corrective Action Plan included as Appendix B of the attached Management’s Section. BDO’s Response – We have reviewed management’s response and our finding remains as indicated.
Finding Number: 2024-008 Prior Year Finding Number: 2023-015 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Program: U.S. Department of the Treasury COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN: 21.027 Award #: N/A Award Year: 10/01/2021 – 09/20/2024 Government Department/Agency: Office of the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice (DMPSJ); Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement (ONSE) Criteria - The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In accordance with the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) Requirements for Pass-Through Entities requires that pass-through entities must: Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes certain information outlined in the section noted above, pre-award assessment, indirect cost rated for the award, assistance listing number, finding and award follow-up and other pertinent actions. In accordance with the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.332 Requirements for Pass-Through Entities requires that pass-through entities Verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified in accordance with Section 180.300. Verification methods are provided in Section 180.300, which include confirming in SAM.gov that a potential subrecipient is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from receiving Federal funds. In accordance with the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.332(e) Requirements for Pass-Through Entities requires that pass-through entities must: Monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: • Review financial and performance reports • Ensure that the subrecipient takes corrective action on all significant developments that negatively affect the subaward. Significant developments include Single Audit findings related to the subaward, other audit findings, site visits, and written notifications from a subrecipient of adverse conditions which will impact their ability to meet the milestones or the objectives of a subaward. When significant developments negatively impact the subaward, a subrecipient must provide the pass-through entity with information on their plan for corrective action and any assistance needed to resolve the situation. • Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by Section 200.521. • Resolve audit findings specifically related to the subaward. However, the pass-through entity is not responsible for resolving cross-cutting audit findings that apply to the subaward and other Federal awards or subawards. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report and has not been excluded from receiving Federal funding (meaning, has not been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant agency for audit or oversight agency for audit to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting audit findings in accordance with section Section 200.513(a)(4)(viii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition – The program’s documented subrecipient monitoring requirements includes risk assessments, monitoring of subrecipients and the submission and review of monthly financial and performance reports. During our testing of the subrecipient’s compliance requirements, we noted the following issues: • Our testing of the program’s subrecipient monitoring requirements includes submission and review of monthly financial and performance reports. We noted for one (1) out of 17 samples, the subrecipient failed to submit their monthly financial and performance reports. • For one (1) out of 17 samples, the agency had no evidence to support it had performed the mandatory follow up on reported audit findings in the subrecipient’s audit report for the Corrective Action taken by the subrecipient to remediate the finding. • For one (1) out of 17 samples, the agency had no evidence that a debarment check was performed before the contract was entered into. The agency’s documented policies and the procurement procedures mandate a debarment check before entering into new contracts. Questioned Costs – Not determinable. Context – This is a condition identified per review of various District agencies’ compliance with specified monitoring requirements on the program’s subrecipients using a statistically valid sample. Effect – Subrecipients may not be properly monitored, which may result in subawards being used for unauthorized purposes in violation of the terms and conditions of the subawards or that the subaward performance goals were not achieved. Cause – There is lack of sufficient documentary evidence to support that the controls are operating as designed related to subrecipient monitoring compliance. Recommendation – We recommend that the agencies maintain sufficient documentation to evidence its internal controls over the risk assessment and monitoring of subrecipients. Related Noncompliance – Noncompliance. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions – While DMPSJ doesn’t agree that it is out of compliance, DMPSJ will ensure documentation is maintained regarding its oversight of grant management. ONSE acknowledges and accepts the finding that the subrecipient failed to submit their monthly and performance reports. The District’s corrective action is described in the Management’s Corrective Action Plan included as Appendix B of the attached Management’s Section. BDO’s Response – We have reviewed management’s response and our finding remains as indicated.
Reference Number: 2024-011 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation State Agency: Agency of Transportation Federal Program: Highway Planning and Construction Assistance Listing Number: 20.205 Award Number and Year: FFY2023 – FFY2024 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance – Per 2 CFR section 200.332, the following requirements are imposed on pass-through entities: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date; (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). (c) Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. (e) Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient (as described in paragraph (b) of this section), the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: (1) Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and (2) Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; (3) Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) omitted required federal award information from subawards it issued in the program and did not adequately monitor subrecipients. Context: Nineteen subawards were selected for testing and the following exceptions were noted: • For 16 of 19 subawards selected for testing, the federal award date was not included on the subaward agreement. • For 1 of 19 subawards selected for testing, the last on-site subrecipient monitoring visit was performed in FY 2019 and the next on-site monitoring did not take place until FY 2024. Per the VTrans subrecipient monitoring plan, on-site monitoring must be performed no less than every three years. Cause: Procedures and internal controls were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required federal information. Although VTrans subsequently modified its subaward issuance process, controls in effect during the audit period were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required information. Procedures and internal controls were also not sufficient to ensure that timely on-site monitoring visits were performed in accordance with its monitoring plan. Effect: Excluding the required federal grant award information at the time of subaward issuance may cause subrecipients and their auditors to be uninformed about specific program and other regulations that apply to the funds they receive. There is also the potential for subrecipients to have incomplete Schedules of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in their Single Audit reports. Failure to conduct adequate subrecipient monitoring may result in a failure of VTrans to detect that subawards are used for unauthorized purposes, are managed in violation of the terms and conditions of the subawards, or that subaward performance goals are not achieved. There is an increased risk that subrecipients could be inappropriately spending and/or inaccurately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by VTrans personnel on a timely basis. Questioned costs: Undetermined. Recommendation: VTrans should review and enhance internal controls and procedures to ensure that all required federal award information is included in subawards and that on-site subrecipient monitoring is conducted timely per the terms of its subrecipient monitoring plan. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2024-002 Federal Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Year: Fiscal Year 2023-24 Name of Department: County Executive Office Department of Aging Department of Arts and Culture Department of Economic Opportunity Category of Finding: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance; Material Noncompliance Criteria In accordance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 200.332(e), all pass-through entities (PTE) must: Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. (2) Ensure that the subrecipient takes corrective action on all significant developments that negatively affect the subaward. Significant developments include Single Audit findings related to the subaward, other audit findings, site visits, and written notification from a subrecipient of adverse conditions which will impact their ability to meet the milestones or the objectives of a subaward. When significant developments negatively impact the subaward, a subrecipient must provide the pass-through entity with information on their plan for corrective action and any assistance needed to resolve the situation. (3) Issue management decision for audit findings pertaining to only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) Resolve audit findings specifically related to the subaward. However, the pass-through entity is not responsible for resolving cross-cutting audit findings that apply to the subaward and other Federal awards or subawards. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report and has not been excluded from receiving Federal funding (meaning, has not been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient’s cognizant agency for audit or oversight agency for audit to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting audit findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(4)(viii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition During our audit of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF) program, we selected fifteen (15) subrecipients with active contracts with the County during FY 2023-24. We noted for seven (7) contracts administered by the Departments of Aging, Arts and Culture, and Economic Opportunity, the departments did not perform subrecipient monitoring related to the CSLFRF program during FY 2023-24. This is a repeat finding of 2023-009. Cause Due to the urgency to implement the CSLFRF program, the departments needed more time to enter into contracts with independent CPA firms to monitor the CSLFRF subrecipients and document the reviews in accordance with subrecipient monitoring requirements. Effect Failure to document monitoring results in noncompliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirements 2 CFR § 200.332(e). Questioned Costs Questioned costs were not determinable. Context Of the fifteen (15) subrecipients selected for testing, which totaled $20,981,306, from a population of 76 subrecipients with expenditures totaling $101,950,949, the departments did not perform subrecipient monitoring for seven (7) subrecipients with expenditures totaling $19,118,116. The sample was not a statistically valid sample. Recommendation We recommend the County monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes and maintain sufficient records of monitoring subrecipients in accordance with subrecipient monitoring requirements.
Reference Number: 2024-002 Federal Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Year: Fiscal Year 2023-24 Name of Department: County Executive Office Department of Aging Department of Arts and Culture Department of Economic Opportunity Category of Finding: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance; Material Noncompliance Criteria In accordance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 200.332(e), all pass-through entities (PTE) must: Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. (2) Ensure that the subrecipient takes corrective action on all significant developments that negatively affect the subaward. Significant developments include Single Audit findings related to the subaward, other audit findings, site visits, and written notification from a subrecipient of adverse conditions which will impact their ability to meet the milestones or the objectives of a subaward. When significant developments negatively impact the subaward, a subrecipient must provide the pass-through entity with information on their plan for corrective action and any assistance needed to resolve the situation. (3) Issue management decision for audit findings pertaining to only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) Resolve audit findings specifically related to the subaward. However, the pass-through entity is not responsible for resolving cross-cutting audit findings that apply to the subaward and other Federal awards or subawards. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report and has not been excluded from receiving Federal funding (meaning, has not been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient’s cognizant agency for audit or oversight agency for audit to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting audit findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(4)(viii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition During our audit of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF) program, we selected fifteen (15) subrecipients with active contracts with the County during FY 2023-24. We noted for seven (7) contracts administered by the Departments of Aging, Arts and Culture, and Economic Opportunity, the departments did not perform subrecipient monitoring related to the CSLFRF program during FY 2023-24. This is a repeat finding of 2023-009. Cause Due to the urgency to implement the CSLFRF program, the departments needed more time to enter into contracts with independent CPA firms to monitor the CSLFRF subrecipients and document the reviews in accordance with subrecipient monitoring requirements. Effect Failure to document monitoring results in noncompliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirements 2 CFR § 200.332(e). Questioned Costs Questioned costs were not determinable. Context Of the fifteen (15) subrecipients selected for testing, which totaled $20,981,306, from a population of 76 subrecipients with expenditures totaling $101,950,949, the departments did not perform subrecipient monitoring for seven (7) subrecipients with expenditures totaling $19,118,116. The sample was not a statistically valid sample. Recommendation We recommend the County monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes and maintain sufficient records of monitoring subrecipients in accordance with subrecipient monitoring requirements.
Assistance Listings number and name: 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States Award numbers and years: 24FABASC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIELCC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIETCO-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FPRLEC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIECTC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs / Cost Principles Questioned costs: $52,754 Assistance Listings number and name: 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Award numbers and years: P031S160090, October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2023; P031S190167, October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2024; P031S200096, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031S200281, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031C210057, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031C210077, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031S220015, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031S220179, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031A230147, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028; P031S230158, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028 Compliance requirements: Activities allowed or unallowed Questioned costs: $20,411 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Total questioned costs: $73,165 Condition—Contrary to federal regulations, State law, and District policies, the District did not always retain documentation supporting the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs’ payroll costs or approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for these programs. Specifically, the District could not provide documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for these programs, such as offer letters, contracts, and personnel action forms, or did not approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for 22 of 54 payroll transactions we tested totaling $73,165. See finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance for a similar finding related to the District not reviewing or approving employee timesheets.1 Also, see Table 1 on the next page for further information. Table 1 Summary of the $73,165 of payroll costs the District did not properly support or approve Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total for both programs Total employees tested 35 19 54 Total employees with unsupported pay rates and lack of authorization to perform work for the programs 7 1 8 Total unsupported payroll costs $52,366 $9,636 $62,002 Total employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed2 2 12 14 Total unapproved payroll costs $388 $10,775 $11,163 Total number of employees with unsupported or unapproved payroll costs 9 13 22 Total salaries not supported $52,754 $20,411 $73,165 Effect—The District’s failure to retain documentation supporting payroll costs and approve time sheets increased the risk that the $52,754 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and $20,411 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs may not have been spent in accordance with their award terms and conditions. Consequently, the District may be required to return these monies to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.3 Further, see Table 2 for information on the overall payroll costs per program during fiscal year 2024 that are at an increased risk of not being spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions. Finally, the District is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Table 2 Calculation of percent of payroll costs to total program expenditures Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total number of employees 279 214 Total payroll costs $3,613,133 $1,984,462 Total program costs $5,026,228 $6,696,263 % of payroll costs to total program costs 72% 30% Cause—The District’s management reported that it did not retain documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for the federal programs for employees hired prior to 2018 as they were archived and support was no longer available, and some offers for temporary employees were made verbally over the phone and never documented. The District’s policies and procedures lack requirements to document all employment offers, including temporary employment offers. Additionally, as discussed in finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance, some supervisors did not follow District policies and procedures requiring employees’ time sheets to be reviewed and approved either before processing payroll or within 3 business days after receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needed approval.1 Finally, District management did not sufficiently monitor whether each college’s Human Resources Department was enforcing these policies and procedures or verifying that supervisors reviewed and approved employees’ time sheets, as required. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the District to maintain records for salaries and wages charged to federal awards that accurately reflect the work performed to ensure they are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated (2 CFR §200.430[g][1][i]). Also, federal regulation, similar to State law and the District’s record retention policies, requires the District to retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor (2 CFR §200.334).4,5 Further, the District’s written procedures require each employee’s time sheet to be reviewed and approved by the employee’s supervisor either before processing payroll or within 3 business days from receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needs approval. Additionally, each college’s Human Resources Department is responsible for verifying that supervisors review and approve time sheets timely.6 Finally, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The District should: 1. Retain documentation for all payroll costs, such as employment agreements or acceptance letters, to demonstrate employees’ salaries and wages are authorized to be charged to federal programs and spent in accordance with the programs’ award terms and conditions. 2. Review the fiscal year 2024 payroll costs for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs to ensure they were properly supported and spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions and coordinate with the U.S. Department of Education, as necessary, to adjust future federal reimbursement requests or repay any unallowable costs the District charged to the programs. 3. Enforce and train employees on District written procedures and requirements to: a. Retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor. b. Ensure supervisors review and approve employees’ time sheets, either before payroll is processed or within 3 business days from receiving the payroll email notification that a time sheet needs approval, to verify employees accurately reported their time worked. This review should be performed after the employee performed the work to ensure the payroll costs charged to the programs accurately reflect the work performed and are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. 4. Update District written procedures to require documentation of all employment offers, including offers for temporary employees. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. 1 Arizona Auditor General. (2024). Report on Internal Control and Compliance, June 30, 2024. Phoenix, AZ. https://www.azauditor.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/MaricopaCountyCommunityCollegeDistrictJune30_2024ReportOnInternalControlAndCompliance.pdf 2 The 14 employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed includes 5 time sheets totaling $6,917 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were never approved by a supervisor and 2 time sheets totaling $388 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States program and 7 time sheets totaling $3,858 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were approved by a supervisor between 1 and 7 days prior to the work being performed by the employee. 3 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient, the District, takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 4 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). (2023). Staff Policy Manual. 5 Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records. (2023) General Retention Schedule Created for All Public Bodies. Retrieved 3/12/25 from https://apps.azlibrary.gov/files/docs/all_general_schedules_searchable.pdf 6 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). Version 1.1 (2019). Monitoring Time Approvals: Monitoring Procedures.
Assistance Listings number and name: 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States Award numbers and years: 24FABASC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIELCC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIETCO-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FPRLEC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIECTC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs / Cost Principles Questioned costs: $52,754 Assistance Listings number and name: 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Award numbers and years: P031S160090, October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2023; P031S190167, October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2024; P031S200096, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031S200281, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031C210057, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031C210077, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031S220015, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031S220179, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031A230147, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028; P031S230158, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028 Compliance requirements: Activities allowed or unallowed Questioned costs: $20,411 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Total questioned costs: $73,165 Condition—Contrary to federal regulations, State law, and District policies, the District did not always retain documentation supporting the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs’ payroll costs or approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for these programs. Specifically, the District could not provide documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for these programs, such as offer letters, contracts, and personnel action forms, or did not approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for 22 of 54 payroll transactions we tested totaling $73,165. See finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance for a similar finding related to the District not reviewing or approving employee timesheets.1 Also, see Table 1 on the next page for further information. Table 1 Summary of the $73,165 of payroll costs the District did not properly support or approve Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total for both programs Total employees tested 35 19 54 Total employees with unsupported pay rates and lack of authorization to perform work for the programs 7 1 8 Total unsupported payroll costs $52,366 $9,636 $62,002 Total employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed2 2 12 14 Total unapproved payroll costs $388 $10,775 $11,163 Total number of employees with unsupported or unapproved payroll costs 9 13 22 Total salaries not supported $52,754 $20,411 $73,165 Effect—The District’s failure to retain documentation supporting payroll costs and approve time sheets increased the risk that the $52,754 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and $20,411 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs may not have been spent in accordance with their award terms and conditions. Consequently, the District may be required to return these monies to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.3 Further, see Table 2 for information on the overall payroll costs per program during fiscal year 2024 that are at an increased risk of not being spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions. Finally, the District is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Table 2 Calculation of percent of payroll costs to total program expenditures Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total number of employees 279 214 Total payroll costs $3,613,133 $1,984,462 Total program costs $5,026,228 $6,696,263 % of payroll costs to total program costs 72% 30% Cause—The District’s management reported that it did not retain documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for the federal programs for employees hired prior to 2018 as they were archived and support was no longer available, and some offers for temporary employees were made verbally over the phone and never documented. The District’s policies and procedures lack requirements to document all employment offers, including temporary employment offers. Additionally, as discussed in finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance, some supervisors did not follow District policies and procedures requiring employees’ time sheets to be reviewed and approved either before processing payroll or within 3 business days after receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needed approval.1 Finally, District management did not sufficiently monitor whether each college’s Human Resources Department was enforcing these policies and procedures or verifying that supervisors reviewed and approved employees’ time sheets, as required. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the District to maintain records for salaries and wages charged to federal awards that accurately reflect the work performed to ensure they are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated (2 CFR §200.430[g][1][i]). Also, federal regulation, similar to State law and the District’s record retention policies, requires the District to retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor (2 CFR §200.334).4,5 Further, the District’s written procedures require each employee’s time sheet to be reviewed and approved by the employee’s supervisor either before processing payroll or within 3 business days from receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needs approval. Additionally, each college’s Human Resources Department is responsible for verifying that supervisors review and approve time sheets timely.6 Finally, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The District should: 1. Retain documentation for all payroll costs, such as employment agreements or acceptance letters, to demonstrate employees’ salaries and wages are authorized to be charged to federal programs and spent in accordance with the programs’ award terms and conditions. 2. Review the fiscal year 2024 payroll costs for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs to ensure they were properly supported and spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions and coordinate with the U.S. Department of Education, as necessary, to adjust future federal reimbursement requests or repay any unallowable costs the District charged to the programs. 3. Enforce and train employees on District written procedures and requirements to: a. Retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor. b. Ensure supervisors review and approve employees’ time sheets, either before payroll is processed or within 3 business days from receiving the payroll email notification that a time sheet needs approval, to verify employees accurately reported their time worked. This review should be performed after the employee performed the work to ensure the payroll costs charged to the programs accurately reflect the work performed and are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. 4. Update District written procedures to require documentation of all employment offers, including offers for temporary employees. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. 1 Arizona Auditor General. (2024). Report on Internal Control and Compliance, June 30, 2024. Phoenix, AZ. https://www.azauditor.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/MaricopaCountyCommunityCollegeDistrictJune30_2024ReportOnInternalControlAndCompliance.pdf 2 The 14 employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed includes 5 time sheets totaling $6,917 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were never approved by a supervisor and 2 time sheets totaling $388 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States program and 7 time sheets totaling $3,858 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were approved by a supervisor between 1 and 7 days prior to the work being performed by the employee. 3 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient, the District, takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 4 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). (2023). Staff Policy Manual. 5 Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records. (2023) General Retention Schedule Created for All Public Bodies. Retrieved 3/12/25 from https://apps.azlibrary.gov/files/docs/all_general_schedules_searchable.pdf 6 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). Version 1.1 (2019). Monitoring Time Approvals: Monitoring Procedures.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Reference Number: 2024-011 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation State Agency: Agency of Transportation Federal Program: Highway Planning and Construction Assistance Listing Number: 20.205 Award Number and Year: FFY2023 – FFY2024 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance – Per 2 CFR section 200.332, the following requirements are imposed on pass-through entities: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date; (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). (c) Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. (e) Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient (as described in paragraph (b) of this section), the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: (1) Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and (2) Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; (3) Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) omitted required federal award information from subawards it issued in the program and did not adequately monitor subrecipients. Context: Nineteen subawards were selected for testing and the following exceptions were noted: • For 16 of 19 subawards selected for testing, the federal award date was not included on the subaward agreement. • For 1 of 19 subawards selected for testing, the last on-site subrecipient monitoring visit was performed in FY 2019 and the next on-site monitoring did not take place until FY 2024. Per the VTrans subrecipient monitoring plan, on-site monitoring must be performed no less than every three years. Cause: Procedures and internal controls were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required federal information. Although VTrans subsequently modified its subaward issuance process, controls in effect during the audit period were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required information. Procedures and internal controls were also not sufficient to ensure that timely on-site monitoring visits were performed in accordance with its monitoring plan. Effect: Excluding the required federal grant award information at the time of subaward issuance may cause subrecipients and their auditors to be uninformed about specific program and other regulations that apply to the funds they receive. There is also the potential for subrecipients to have incomplete Schedules of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in their Single Audit reports. Failure to conduct adequate subrecipient monitoring may result in a failure of VTrans to detect that subawards are used for unauthorized purposes, are managed in violation of the terms and conditions of the subawards, or that subaward performance goals are not achieved. There is an increased risk that subrecipients could be inappropriately spending and/or inaccurately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by VTrans personnel on a timely basis. Questioned costs: Undetermined. Recommendation: VTrans should review and enhance internal controls and procedures to ensure that all required federal award information is included in subawards and that on-site subrecipient monitoring is conducted timely per the terms of its subrecipient monitoring plan. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2024-002 Federal Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Year: Fiscal Year 2023-24 Name of Department: County Executive Office Department of Aging Department of Arts and Culture Department of Economic Opportunity Category of Finding: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance; Material Noncompliance Criteria In accordance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 200.332(e), all pass-through entities (PTE) must: Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. (2) Ensure that the subrecipient takes corrective action on all significant developments that negatively affect the subaward. Significant developments include Single Audit findings related to the subaward, other audit findings, site visits, and written notification from a subrecipient of adverse conditions which will impact their ability to meet the milestones or the objectives of a subaward. When significant developments negatively impact the subaward, a subrecipient must provide the pass-through entity with information on their plan for corrective action and any assistance needed to resolve the situation. (3) Issue management decision for audit findings pertaining to only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) Resolve audit findings specifically related to the subaward. However, the pass-through entity is not responsible for resolving cross-cutting audit findings that apply to the subaward and other Federal awards or subawards. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report and has not been excluded from receiving Federal funding (meaning, has not been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient’s cognizant agency for audit or oversight agency for audit to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting audit findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(4)(viii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition During our audit of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF) program, we selected fifteen (15) subrecipients with active contracts with the County during FY 2023-24. We noted for seven (7) contracts administered by the Departments of Aging, Arts and Culture, and Economic Opportunity, the departments did not perform subrecipient monitoring related to the CSLFRF program during FY 2023-24. This is a repeat finding of 2023-009. Cause Due to the urgency to implement the CSLFRF program, the departments needed more time to enter into contracts with independent CPA firms to monitor the CSLFRF subrecipients and document the reviews in accordance with subrecipient monitoring requirements. Effect Failure to document monitoring results in noncompliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirements 2 CFR § 200.332(e). Questioned Costs Questioned costs were not determinable. Context Of the fifteen (15) subrecipients selected for testing, which totaled $20,981,306, from a population of 76 subrecipients with expenditures totaling $101,950,949, the departments did not perform subrecipient monitoring for seven (7) subrecipients with expenditures totaling $19,118,116. The sample was not a statistically valid sample. Recommendation We recommend the County monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes and maintain sufficient records of monitoring subrecipients in accordance with subrecipient monitoring requirements.
Reference Number: 2024-002 Federal Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Year: Fiscal Year 2023-24 Name of Department: County Executive Office Department of Aging Department of Arts and Culture Department of Economic Opportunity Category of Finding: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance; Material Noncompliance Criteria In accordance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 200.332(e), all pass-through entities (PTE) must: Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. (2) Ensure that the subrecipient takes corrective action on all significant developments that negatively affect the subaward. Significant developments include Single Audit findings related to the subaward, other audit findings, site visits, and written notification from a subrecipient of adverse conditions which will impact their ability to meet the milestones or the objectives of a subaward. When significant developments negatively impact the subaward, a subrecipient must provide the pass-through entity with information on their plan for corrective action and any assistance needed to resolve the situation. (3) Issue management decision for audit findings pertaining to only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) Resolve audit findings specifically related to the subaward. However, the pass-through entity is not responsible for resolving cross-cutting audit findings that apply to the subaward and other Federal awards or subawards. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report and has not been excluded from receiving Federal funding (meaning, has not been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient’s cognizant agency for audit or oversight agency for audit to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting audit findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(4)(viii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition During our audit of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF) program, we selected fifteen (15) subrecipients with active contracts with the County during FY 2023-24. We noted for seven (7) contracts administered by the Departments of Aging, Arts and Culture, and Economic Opportunity, the departments did not perform subrecipient monitoring related to the CSLFRF program during FY 2023-24. This is a repeat finding of 2023-009. Cause Due to the urgency to implement the CSLFRF program, the departments needed more time to enter into contracts with independent CPA firms to monitor the CSLFRF subrecipients and document the reviews in accordance with subrecipient monitoring requirements. Effect Failure to document monitoring results in noncompliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirements 2 CFR § 200.332(e). Questioned Costs Questioned costs were not determinable. Context Of the fifteen (15) subrecipients selected for testing, which totaled $20,981,306, from a population of 76 subrecipients with expenditures totaling $101,950,949, the departments did not perform subrecipient monitoring for seven (7) subrecipients with expenditures totaling $19,118,116. The sample was not a statistically valid sample. Recommendation We recommend the County monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes and maintain sufficient records of monitoring subrecipients in accordance with subrecipient monitoring requirements.
Assistance Listings number and name: 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States Award numbers and years: 24FABASC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIELCC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIETCO-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FPRLEC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIECTC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs / Cost Principles Questioned costs: $52,754 Assistance Listings number and name: 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Award numbers and years: P031S160090, October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2023; P031S190167, October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2024; P031S200096, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031S200281, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031C210057, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031C210077, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031S220015, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031S220179, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031A230147, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028; P031S230158, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028 Compliance requirements: Activities allowed or unallowed Questioned costs: $20,411 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Total questioned costs: $73,165 Condition—Contrary to federal regulations, State law, and District policies, the District did not always retain documentation supporting the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs’ payroll costs or approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for these programs. Specifically, the District could not provide documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for these programs, such as offer letters, contracts, and personnel action forms, or did not approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for 22 of 54 payroll transactions we tested totaling $73,165. See finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance for a similar finding related to the District not reviewing or approving employee timesheets.1 Also, see Table 1 on the next page for further information. Table 1 Summary of the $73,165 of payroll costs the District did not properly support or approve Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total for both programs Total employees tested 35 19 54 Total employees with unsupported pay rates and lack of authorization to perform work for the programs 7 1 8 Total unsupported payroll costs $52,366 $9,636 $62,002 Total employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed2 2 12 14 Total unapproved payroll costs $388 $10,775 $11,163 Total number of employees with unsupported or unapproved payroll costs 9 13 22 Total salaries not supported $52,754 $20,411 $73,165 Effect—The District’s failure to retain documentation supporting payroll costs and approve time sheets increased the risk that the $52,754 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and $20,411 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs may not have been spent in accordance with their award terms and conditions. Consequently, the District may be required to return these monies to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.3 Further, see Table 2 for information on the overall payroll costs per program during fiscal year 2024 that are at an increased risk of not being spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions. Finally, the District is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Table 2 Calculation of percent of payroll costs to total program expenditures Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total number of employees 279 214 Total payroll costs $3,613,133 $1,984,462 Total program costs $5,026,228 $6,696,263 % of payroll costs to total program costs 72% 30% Cause—The District’s management reported that it did not retain documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for the federal programs for employees hired prior to 2018 as they were archived and support was no longer available, and some offers for temporary employees were made verbally over the phone and never documented. The District’s policies and procedures lack requirements to document all employment offers, including temporary employment offers. Additionally, as discussed in finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance, some supervisors did not follow District policies and procedures requiring employees’ time sheets to be reviewed and approved either before processing payroll or within 3 business days after receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needed approval.1 Finally, District management did not sufficiently monitor whether each college’s Human Resources Department was enforcing these policies and procedures or verifying that supervisors reviewed and approved employees’ time sheets, as required. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the District to maintain records for salaries and wages charged to federal awards that accurately reflect the work performed to ensure they are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated (2 CFR §200.430[g][1][i]). Also, federal regulation, similar to State law and the District’s record retention policies, requires the District to retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor (2 CFR §200.334).4,5 Further, the District’s written procedures require each employee’s time sheet to be reviewed and approved by the employee’s supervisor either before processing payroll or within 3 business days from receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needs approval. Additionally, each college’s Human Resources Department is responsible for verifying that supervisors review and approve time sheets timely.6 Finally, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The District should: 1. Retain documentation for all payroll costs, such as employment agreements or acceptance letters, to demonstrate employees’ salaries and wages are authorized to be charged to federal programs and spent in accordance with the programs’ award terms and conditions. 2. Review the fiscal year 2024 payroll costs for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs to ensure they were properly supported and spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions and coordinate with the U.S. Department of Education, as necessary, to adjust future federal reimbursement requests or repay any unallowable costs the District charged to the programs. 3. Enforce and train employees on District written procedures and requirements to: a. Retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor. b. Ensure supervisors review and approve employees’ time sheets, either before payroll is processed or within 3 business days from receiving the payroll email notification that a time sheet needs approval, to verify employees accurately reported their time worked. This review should be performed after the employee performed the work to ensure the payroll costs charged to the programs accurately reflect the work performed and are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. 4. Update District written procedures to require documentation of all employment offers, including offers for temporary employees. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. 1 Arizona Auditor General. (2024). Report on Internal Control and Compliance, June 30, 2024. Phoenix, AZ. https://www.azauditor.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/MaricopaCountyCommunityCollegeDistrictJune30_2024ReportOnInternalControlAndCompliance.pdf 2 The 14 employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed includes 5 time sheets totaling $6,917 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were never approved by a supervisor and 2 time sheets totaling $388 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States program and 7 time sheets totaling $3,858 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were approved by a supervisor between 1 and 7 days prior to the work being performed by the employee. 3 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient, the District, takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 4 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). (2023). Staff Policy Manual. 5 Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records. (2023) General Retention Schedule Created for All Public Bodies. Retrieved 3/12/25 from https://apps.azlibrary.gov/files/docs/all_general_schedules_searchable.pdf 6 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). Version 1.1 (2019). Monitoring Time Approvals: Monitoring Procedures.
Assistance Listings number and name: 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States Award numbers and years: 24FABASC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIELCC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIETCO-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FPRLEC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIECTC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs / Cost Principles Questioned costs: $52,754 Assistance Listings number and name: 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Award numbers and years: P031S160090, October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2023; P031S190167, October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2024; P031S200096, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031S200281, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031C210057, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031C210077, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031S220015, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031S220179, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031A230147, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028; P031S230158, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028 Compliance requirements: Activities allowed or unallowed Questioned costs: $20,411 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Total questioned costs: $73,165 Condition—Contrary to federal regulations, State law, and District policies, the District did not always retain documentation supporting the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs’ payroll costs or approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for these programs. Specifically, the District could not provide documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for these programs, such as offer letters, contracts, and personnel action forms, or did not approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for 22 of 54 payroll transactions we tested totaling $73,165. See finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance for a similar finding related to the District not reviewing or approving employee timesheets.1 Also, see Table 1 on the next page for further information. Table 1 Summary of the $73,165 of payroll costs the District did not properly support or approve Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total for both programs Total employees tested 35 19 54 Total employees with unsupported pay rates and lack of authorization to perform work for the programs 7 1 8 Total unsupported payroll costs $52,366 $9,636 $62,002 Total employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed2 2 12 14 Total unapproved payroll costs $388 $10,775 $11,163 Total number of employees with unsupported or unapproved payroll costs 9 13 22 Total salaries not supported $52,754 $20,411 $73,165 Effect—The District’s failure to retain documentation supporting payroll costs and approve time sheets increased the risk that the $52,754 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and $20,411 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs may not have been spent in accordance with their award terms and conditions. Consequently, the District may be required to return these monies to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.3 Further, see Table 2 for information on the overall payroll costs per program during fiscal year 2024 that are at an increased risk of not being spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions. Finally, the District is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Table 2 Calculation of percent of payroll costs to total program expenditures Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total number of employees 279 214 Total payroll costs $3,613,133 $1,984,462 Total program costs $5,026,228 $6,696,263 % of payroll costs to total program costs 72% 30% Cause—The District’s management reported that it did not retain documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for the federal programs for employees hired prior to 2018 as they were archived and support was no longer available, and some offers for temporary employees were made verbally over the phone and never documented. The District’s policies and procedures lack requirements to document all employment offers, including temporary employment offers. Additionally, as discussed in finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance, some supervisors did not follow District policies and procedures requiring employees’ time sheets to be reviewed and approved either before processing payroll or within 3 business days after receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needed approval.1 Finally, District management did not sufficiently monitor whether each college’s Human Resources Department was enforcing these policies and procedures or verifying that supervisors reviewed and approved employees’ time sheets, as required. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the District to maintain records for salaries and wages charged to federal awards that accurately reflect the work performed to ensure they are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated (2 CFR §200.430[g][1][i]). Also, federal regulation, similar to State law and the District’s record retention policies, requires the District to retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor (2 CFR §200.334).4,5 Further, the District’s written procedures require each employee’s time sheet to be reviewed and approved by the employee’s supervisor either before processing payroll or within 3 business days from receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needs approval. Additionally, each college’s Human Resources Department is responsible for verifying that supervisors review and approve time sheets timely.6 Finally, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The District should: 1. Retain documentation for all payroll costs, such as employment agreements or acceptance letters, to demonstrate employees’ salaries and wages are authorized to be charged to federal programs and spent in accordance with the programs’ award terms and conditions. 2. Review the fiscal year 2024 payroll costs for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs to ensure they were properly supported and spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions and coordinate with the U.S. Department of Education, as necessary, to adjust future federal reimbursement requests or repay any unallowable costs the District charged to the programs. 3. Enforce and train employees on District written procedures and requirements to: a. Retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor. b. Ensure supervisors review and approve employees’ time sheets, either before payroll is processed or within 3 business days from receiving the payroll email notification that a time sheet needs approval, to verify employees accurately reported their time worked. This review should be performed after the employee performed the work to ensure the payroll costs charged to the programs accurately reflect the work performed and are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. 4. Update District written procedures to require documentation of all employment offers, including offers for temporary employees. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. 1 Arizona Auditor General. (2024). Report on Internal Control and Compliance, June 30, 2024. Phoenix, AZ. https://www.azauditor.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/MaricopaCountyCommunityCollegeDistrictJune30_2024ReportOnInternalControlAndCompliance.pdf 2 The 14 employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed includes 5 time sheets totaling $6,917 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were never approved by a supervisor and 2 time sheets totaling $388 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States program and 7 time sheets totaling $3,858 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were approved by a supervisor between 1 and 7 days prior to the work being performed by the employee. 3 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient, the District, takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 4 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). (2023). Staff Policy Manual. 5 Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records. (2023) General Retention Schedule Created for All Public Bodies. Retrieved 3/12/25 from https://apps.azlibrary.gov/files/docs/all_general_schedules_searchable.pdf 6 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). Version 1.1 (2019). Monitoring Time Approvals: Monitoring Procedures.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Cluster name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Award numbers and years: DI21-002286, April 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-001, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 23-003, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; Alert 24-002, July 1, 2023 through May 31, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award numbers and years: 1505-0271, March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024; 19418, May 31, 2023 through September 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-through grantors: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, City of Tucson, Arizona Housing Coalition, and Arizona Department of Public Safety Questioned costs: N/A Assistance Listings number and name: 97.024 COVID-19 - Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program Award numbers and years: 027200-048, November 1, 2021 through December 30, 2024; 027200-056, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*115, March 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024; 23*154, April 1, 2023 through February 29, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass-through grantor: United Way EFSP Questioned costs: $347,345 Assistance Listings number and name: 97.141 Shelter and Services Program Award number and year: 24*039, March 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Questioned costs: N/A Compliance requirement: Subrecipient monitoring Total questioned costs: $347,345 Condition—The County’s Grants Management and Innovation Department (Department) awarded over $29 million to 27 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024, or 29% of the County’s total federal expenditures for the federal programs shown in Table 1 below, but did not perform all the required monitoring of its subrecipients’ activities or compliance with award terms and program requirements. Table 1 Summary of subrecipients by federal program Fiscal year 2024 Federal program name Subrecipient information Total number Number tested Total awards Total federal expenditures Subrecipient awards as a percentage of total federal expenditures Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster 4 4 $ 568,095 $12,253,972 4.6% Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 17 7 17,241,445 56,862,338 30.3% Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program (EFS) 4 4 7,810,673 22,622,229 34.5% Shelter and Services Program (SSP) 2 2 3,560,449 8,172,063 43.5% Total 27 17 $29,180,662 $99,910,602 29.2% While the Department performed some monitoring procedures during the year, those procedures were not sufficient to evaluate its subrecipients’ use of program monies in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Specifically, contrary to federal regulations, the Department did not perform the following required monitoring procedures: • Perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed—The Department did not perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed. Specifically, the Department’s risk assessment procedures identified 7 high-risk and 4 moderate-risk subrecipients, but it did not modify its monitoring activities to address the risks identified. Additional monitoring activities could include providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures like reviewing the subrecipient’s policies and procedures obtained to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. • Document monitoring procedures, results, and actions taken—For 4 of 4 WIOA subrecipients, 7 of 7 SLFRF subrecipients, 3 of 4 EFS subrecipients, and 1 of 2 SSP subrecipients we tested, while the Department completed and maintained a checklist of subrecipient monitoring procedures, it did not document monitoring results or Department actions taken for these subrecipients based on the checklist results. • Verify subrecipient single audits were conducted timely—The Department did not verify whether 1 of its 4 WIOA subrecipients had a single audit performed. Effect—The Department’s failure to perform required monitoring contributed to $347,345 of misspent EFS program monies that the Department may be required to return to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.1 Specifically, the Department’s not reviewing subrecipient procurement policies and procedures aided in allowing 1 EFS subrecipient to render services for which conflicts of interest existed. Specifically, the EFS subrecipient, Catholic Community Services (CCS), began having laundry services provided by a vendor, Amado Laundry, in April 2023, for which it then self-reported to the County a conflict-of-interest violation in May 2024. This violation was a result of a CCS employee forming a vendor relationship with Amado Laundry, which was owned by the employee’s mother. After the Department’s management was made aware of the conflict of interest, they performed monitoring procedures over CCS and identified noncompliance with federal procurement guidelines totaling $347,345, including determining that Amado Laundry charged a rate double the average rates charged by competitors. The County issued a management letter to CCS on September 27, 2024, communicating a conflict-of-interest finding and a procurement standards finding. The conflict-of-interest finding required CCS to develop new, written procurement-related conflict-of-interest procedures in compliance with federal regulations and to create and maintain an ongoing training program related to these federally compliant conflict-of-interest procedures for employees. Further, there is an increased risk that $29 million of program monies the Department awarded to subrecipients may not be spent in accordance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. If monies are spent inconsistent with program requirements, those who intended to benefit from the program may not receive all the services or other benefits they otherwise would have received. Also, the Department’s not verifying subrecipient single audits were conducted may result in the Department’s not following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program and/or issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. Finally, the County is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that they did not always follow County policies and procedures and only performed limited procedures because their subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures were outdated, the number of subrecipients increased significantly during the fiscal year, and they did not have sufficient staff to monitor all subrecipients. The Department’s management also reported that it prioritized transitioning to a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system rather than monitoring all subrecipients. Further, the County’s policies lacked requirements to perform monitoring activities based on risk assessments performed and to review subrecipients’ policies and procedures to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the County to monitor subrecipients, which includes required monitoring procedures for (2 CFR §200.332): • Assessing the risk of each subrecipient’s noncompliance and performing monitoring activities based on those risk assessments, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. • Reviewing financial and performance reports. • Verifying single audits were conducted timely. • Following up on and ensuring corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program. • Issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. In addition, County policies require the County to: • Assess subrecipient risk and establish a monitoring plan and perform monitoring procedures at least every 2 years, including verification of internal controls.2,3 • Review the Federal Audit Clearinghouse at least quarterly to review subrecipient single audits and issue management decision letters, as necessary.2 • Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures, including the monitoring procedure’s results and any Department actions taken.3 Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations to the County— 1. Perform required monitoring of its subrecipients and their compliance with the award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 2. Follow its established policies and procedures for performing and documenting monitoring reviews of subrecipients to: a. Maintain documentation of monitoring procedures demonstrating they were performed, including the monitoring procedures’ results and any Department actions taken, if appropriate. b. Verify subrecipients receive timely single audits, follow up on and ensure that corrective action is taken on audit findings that could potentially affect the program, and issue management decisions for audit findings pertaining to the federal award. 3. Update its policies and procedures to include: a. A process to determine the appropriate monitoring activities to perform based on subrecipient risk assessments performed, such as providing training or technical assistance on program-related matters, and performing on-site reviews, selective audits, and/or other monitoring procedures. b. Review subrecipients’ policies and procedures, including procurement processes, to ensure the subrecipients complied with award terms, program requirements, and federal regulations. 4. Prioritize and allocate sufficient resources, such as staffing, to comply with the award terms, program requirements, federal regulations, and its updated policies, and designate an individual(s) to perform necessary subrecipient-monitoring procedures. 5. Work with U.S. Department of Homeland Security to determine if it will require the Department to reimburse $347,345 in questioned costs. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-101 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 2 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-04: Subrecipient Risk Assessment / Management Decisions. 3 Pima County. (2018, June). Grants Management & Innovation Policy number GMI-28: Subrecipient Monitoring.
Criteria: 2 CFR 200.332 notes, “All pass-through entities must… (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition: The Organization noted they do not request and review audited financial statements for all subrecipients. Questioned Costs: N/A Cause and Effect: Without reviewing audited financial statements, subrecipients may have deficiencies in internal control or compliance which could lead to future unallowable expenditures to be incurred. Recommendation: We recommend ACT evaluates policies and procedures to ensure appropriate monitoring is performed over all subrecipients and reviews audited financial statements for those subrecipients that are required to have an audit performed. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with this Single Audit Finding and response is included in the Corrective Action Plan.
Criteria: 2 CFR 200.332 notes, “All pass-through entities must… (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition: The Organization noted they do not request and review audited financial statements for all subrecipients. Questioned Costs: N/A Cause and Effect: Without reviewing audited financial statements, subrecipients may have deficiencies in internal control or compliance which could lead to future unallowable expenditures to be incurred. Recommendation: We recommend ACT evaluates policies and procedures to ensure appropriate monitoring is performed over all subrecipients and reviews audited financial statements for those subrecipients that are required to have an audit performed. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with this Single Audit Finding and response is included in the Corrective Action Plan.
Finding Number: 2023-007 Repeat Finding: Yes Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance Description: Subrecipient Monitoring and Management Major Program: AL#93.772 - Tribal Public Health Capacity Building and Quality Improvement Umbrella Cooperative Agreement – Direct Award (DHHS) – Award numbers: 1 NU38TO000023-01-00, 6 NU38TO000023- 01-01, 6 NU38OT000257-05-03 and 6 NU38OT000257C3 Questioned Costs: None How the questioned costs were computed: N/A Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: The Organization did not comply with any of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.332. Criteria: The subrecipient monitoring and management requirements that are codified in 2 CFR Part 200.332 requires the pass-through entity must: a. Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes: 1. Federal award identification; 2. All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; 3. Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports. 4. (i) An approved federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal Government. If no approved rate exists, the passthrough entity must determine the appropriate rate in collaboration with the subrecipient, which is either: 1. The negotiated indirect cost rate between the pass-through entity and the subrecipient; 2. The de minimis indirect cost rate (ii) The pass-through entity must not require use of a de minimis indirect cost rate if the subrecipient has a Federally approved rate. (iii) 5. A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass-through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient’s records and financial statements as necessary for the pass-through entity to meet the requirements of this part; and 6. Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. b. Evaluate each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. c. Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. d. Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: 1. Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. 2. Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. 3. Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. 4. The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the passthrough entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. e. Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient, the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: 1. Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and 2. Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; 3. Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. f. Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. g. Consider whether the results of the subrecipient's audits, on-site reviews, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity's own records. h. Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in § 200.339 of this part and in program regulations. Cause: The Organization’s management was not aware of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements. Effect: The Organization was not in compliance with any of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements, resulting in a material noncompliance and a material weakness in internal controls over compliance. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization implement systems and procedures to ensure compliance with the subrecipient monitoring and management compliance requirements. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and has committed to a corrective action plan.
Finding Number: 2023-007 Repeat Finding: Yes Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance Description: Subrecipient Monitoring and Management Major Program: AL#93.772 - Tribal Public Health Capacity Building and Quality Improvement Umbrella Cooperative Agreement – Direct Award (DHHS) – Award numbers: 1 NU38TO000023-01-00, 6 NU38TO000023- 01-01, 6 NU38OT000257-05-03 and 6 NU38OT000257C3 Questioned Costs: None How the questioned costs were computed: N/A Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: The Organization did not comply with any of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.332. Criteria: The subrecipient monitoring and management requirements that are codified in 2 CFR Part 200.332 requires the pass-through entity must: a. Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes: 1. Federal award identification; 2. All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; 3. Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports. 4. (i) An approved federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal Government. If no approved rate exists, the passthrough entity must determine the appropriate rate in collaboration with the subrecipient, which is either: 1. The negotiated indirect cost rate between the pass-through entity and the subrecipient; 2. The de minimis indirect cost rate (ii) The pass-through entity must not require use of a de minimis indirect cost rate if the subrecipient has a Federally approved rate. (iii) 5. A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass-through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient’s records and financial statements as necessary for the pass-through entity to meet the requirements of this part; and 6. Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. b. Evaluate each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. c. Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. d. Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: 1. Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. 2. Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. 3. Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. 4. The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the passthrough entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. e. Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient, the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: 1. Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and 2. Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; 3. Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. f. Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. g. Consider whether the results of the subrecipient's audits, on-site reviews, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity's own records. h. Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in § 200.339 of this part and in program regulations. Cause: The Organization’s management was not aware of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements. Effect: The Organization was not in compliance with any of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements, resulting in a material noncompliance and a material weakness in internal controls over compliance. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization implement systems and procedures to ensure compliance with the subrecipient monitoring and management compliance requirements. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and has committed to a corrective action plan.
Criteria: 2 CFR 200.332 notes, “All pass-through entities must… (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition: The Organization noted they do not request and review audited financial statements for all subrecipients. Questioned Costs: N/A Cause and Effect: Without reviewing audited financial statements, subrecipients may have deficiencies in internal control or compliance which could lead to future unallowable expenditures to be incurred. Recommendation: We recommend ACT evaluates policies and procedures to ensure appropriate monitoring is performed over all subrecipients and reviews audited financial statements for those subrecipients that are required to have an audit performed. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with this Single Audit Finding and response is included in the Corrective Action Plan.
Criteria: 2 CFR 200.332 notes, “All pass-through entities must… (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition: The Organization noted they do not request and review audited financial statements for all subrecipients. Questioned Costs: N/A Cause and Effect: Without reviewing audited financial statements, subrecipients may have deficiencies in internal control or compliance which could lead to future unallowable expenditures to be incurred. Recommendation: We recommend ACT evaluates policies and procedures to ensure appropriate monitoring is performed over all subrecipients and reviews audited financial statements for those subrecipients that are required to have an audit performed. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with this Single Audit Finding and response is included in the Corrective Action Plan.
Finding Number: 2023-007 Repeat Finding: Yes Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance Description: Subrecipient Monitoring and Management Major Program: AL#93.772 - Tribal Public Health Capacity Building and Quality Improvement Umbrella Cooperative Agreement – Direct Award (DHHS) – Award numbers: 1 NU38TO000023-01-00, 6 NU38TO000023- 01-01, 6 NU38OT000257-05-03 and 6 NU38OT000257C3 Questioned Costs: None How the questioned costs were computed: N/A Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: The Organization did not comply with any of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.332. Criteria: The subrecipient monitoring and management requirements that are codified in 2 CFR Part 200.332 requires the pass-through entity must: a. Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes: 1. Federal award identification; 2. All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; 3. Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports. 4. (i) An approved federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal Government. If no approved rate exists, the passthrough entity must determine the appropriate rate in collaboration with the subrecipient, which is either: 1. The negotiated indirect cost rate between the pass-through entity and the subrecipient; 2. The de minimis indirect cost rate (ii) The pass-through entity must not require use of a de minimis indirect cost rate if the subrecipient has a Federally approved rate. (iii) 5. A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass-through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient’s records and financial statements as necessary for the pass-through entity to meet the requirements of this part; and 6. Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. b. Evaluate each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. c. Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. d. Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: 1. Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. 2. Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. 3. Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. 4. The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the passthrough entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. e. Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient, the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: 1. Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and 2. Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; 3. Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. f. Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. g. Consider whether the results of the subrecipient's audits, on-site reviews, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity's own records. h. Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in § 200.339 of this part and in program regulations. Cause: The Organization’s management was not aware of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements. Effect: The Organization was not in compliance with any of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements, resulting in a material noncompliance and a material weakness in internal controls over compliance. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization implement systems and procedures to ensure compliance with the subrecipient monitoring and management compliance requirements. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and has committed to a corrective action plan.
Finding Number: 2023-007 Repeat Finding: Yes Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance Description: Subrecipient Monitoring and Management Major Program: AL#93.772 - Tribal Public Health Capacity Building and Quality Improvement Umbrella Cooperative Agreement – Direct Award (DHHS) – Award numbers: 1 NU38TO000023-01-00, 6 NU38TO000023- 01-01, 6 NU38OT000257-05-03 and 6 NU38OT000257C3 Questioned Costs: None How the questioned costs were computed: N/A Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: The Organization did not comply with any of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.332. Criteria: The subrecipient monitoring and management requirements that are codified in 2 CFR Part 200.332 requires the pass-through entity must: a. Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes: 1. Federal award identification; 2. All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; 3. Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports. 4. (i) An approved federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal Government. If no approved rate exists, the passthrough entity must determine the appropriate rate in collaboration with the subrecipient, which is either: 1. The negotiated indirect cost rate between the pass-through entity and the subrecipient; 2. The de minimis indirect cost rate (ii) The pass-through entity must not require use of a de minimis indirect cost rate if the subrecipient has a Federally approved rate. (iii) 5. A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass-through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient’s records and financial statements as necessary for the pass-through entity to meet the requirements of this part; and 6. Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. b. Evaluate each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. c. Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. d. Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: 1. Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. 2. Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. 3. Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. 4. The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the passthrough entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. e. Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient, the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: 1. Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and 2. Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; 3. Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. f. Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. g. Consider whether the results of the subrecipient's audits, on-site reviews, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity's own records. h. Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in § 200.339 of this part and in program regulations. Cause: The Organization’s management was not aware of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements. Effect: The Organization was not in compliance with any of the subrecipient monitoring and management requirements, resulting in a material noncompliance and a material weakness in internal controls over compliance. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization implement systems and procedures to ensure compliance with the subrecipient monitoring and management compliance requirements. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and has committed to a corrective action plan.
2023-002 Subrecipient Monitoring Public Health Training Centers Program – Assistance Listing No. 93.516 Award Number: 1 T29HP46735‐01‐00 – Award Period: September 15, 2022 through September 14, 2025 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration with Academia to Strengthen Public Health – Assistance Listing No. 93.967 Award Number: G2513_AG-1146 Amendment #1 – Award Period: February 1, 2023 through November 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Condition: During our testing of subrecipients, we noted documentation was not maintained demonstrating the Organization checked for suspension and debarment prior to contracting with subrecipients, subrecipient vs contractor determinations, evaluation of each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, or obtaining/reviewing the most recent single audit reports for subrecipients to address findings related to a particular subaward. Criteria: According to 2 CFR 200.331, pass-through entities must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor. 2 CFR 200.332 requires every subaward agreement include certain information including the subrecipient’s unique entity identifier (see paragraph (a) for a list of all required data elements); additionally, all pass-through entities must: (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. (e) Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient (as described in paragraph (b) of this section), the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: (1) Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and (2) Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; (3) Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient's audits, on-site reviews, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity's own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in § 200.339 of this part and in program regulations. 2 CFR 180.22 requires that contract awards not be made to parties listed on the government wide exclusions in the system for Award Management, which contains the names of parties debarred, suspended or otherwise excluded by agencies as well as parties declared ineligible under statutory or regulatory authority. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: The Organization did not have a process in place to ensure all required elements of subrecipient monitoring were documented and retained in their records. Effect: Inadequate monitoring procedures and records may not detect subrecipient noncompliance on a timely basis. This could result in the Organization entering into subrecipient agreements with organizations who are ineligible to receive federal funds or might otherwise not comply with federal laws and regulations. Recommendation: We recommend that management implement procedures to ensure that future subrecipient agreements are compared against all requirements in 2 CFR 200.331, 2 CFR 200.332, and 2 CFR 180.22 and that formal documentation of such considerations be maintained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.
FINDING 2023-002 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Number: 84.425U Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): S425U210013 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance related to the COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) funds passed through to subrecipients. The School Corporation received and passed through to subrecipients $420,500 of ESF funds. The School Corporation is to clearly identify the award and applicable requirements to the subrecipients, evaluate the risk of noncompliance related to the subrecipients to determine appropriate monitoring of the subaward, and monitor the activities of the subrecipients to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals. The School Corporation did not enter into an agreement with the subrecipients. As such there is no agreement between the School Corporation and the subrecipients that clearly identifies the award as a subaward or includes all the required data elements. In addition, the School Corporation did not have any policies or procedures in place to evaluate the subrecipients' risk of noncompliance or to monitor the activity of the subrecipients. Per inquiry of the School Corporation, it was determined an evaluation of the risk of noncompliance for the subrecipients was not completed, nor did the subrecipients' files support any such evaluation. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.332 states: "All pass-through entities must: INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 WEST LAFAYETTE COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and include the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward notification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) Federal award identification. (i) Subrecipient name (which must match the name associated with its unique entity identifier); (ii) Subrecipient's unique entity identifier; (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date (see the definition of Federal award date in § 200.1 of this part) of award to the recipient by the Federal agency; (v) Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; (vi) Subaward Budget Period Start and End Date; (vii) Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient; (viii) Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity including the current financial obligation; (ix) Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the passthrough entity; (x) Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); (xi) Name of Federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the Pass-through entity; (xii) Assistance Listings number and Title; the pass-through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the Assistance Listings Number at time of disbursement; (xiii) Identification of whether the award is R&D; and (xiv) Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged) per § 200.414. (2) All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 WEST LAFAYETTE COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (3) Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) (i) An approved federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal Government. If no approved rate exists, the pass-through entity must determine the appropriate rate in collaboration with the subrecipient, which is either: (A) The negotiated indirect cost rate between the pass-through entity and the subrecipient; which can be based on a prior negotiated rate between a different PTE and the same subrecipient. If basing the rate on a previously negotiated rate, the passthrough entity is not required to collect information justifying this rate, but may elect to do so; (B) The de minimis indirect cost rate. (ii) The pass-through entity must not require use of a de minimis indirect cost rate if the subrecipient has a Federally approved rate. Subrecipients can elect to use the cost allocation method to account for indirect costs in accordance with § 200.405(d). (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass-through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient's records and financial statements as necessary for the pass-through entity to meet the requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. . . . (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). (c) Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 WEST LAFAYETTE COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. (e) Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient (as described in paragraph (b) of this section), the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: (1) Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on programrelated matters; and (2) Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; (3) Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient's audits, on-site reviews, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity's own records. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 WEST LAFAYETTE COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in § 200.339 of this part and in program regulations." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, the School Corporation did not properly evaluate the subrecipients risk of noncompliance or adequately monitor the subrecipients. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls, including segregation of duties, to evaluate the subrecipients risk of noncompliance and adequately monitor the subrecipients. Additionally, policies and procedures should be implemented to ensure appropriate reviews, approvals, and oversight are taking place, as needed, to evaluate and monitor its subrecipients. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Reference Number: 2023-011 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation State Agency: Agency of Transportation Federal Program: Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit Program Assistance Listing Number: 20.509 Award Number and Year: VT2016-007-02 (9/23/2016 – 6/20/2023), VT-2017-007-01 (8/3/2017 – 6/21/2023), VT-2019-006-01 (9/20/2017 – 9/30/2022), VT-2020-005-00 (5/26/2020 – 9/30/2022), VT-2020-011-00 (9/9/2020 – 9/30/2023), VT-2020-012-00 (9/18/2020 – 9/30/2023), VT-2021-014-01 (9/20/2021 – 9/30/2023), VT-2022-001-02 (5/12/2022 – 6/30/2028) Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance – Per 2 CFR section 200.332, the following requirements are imposed on pass-through entities: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date; (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). (c) Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. (e) Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient (as described in paragraph (b) of this section), the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: (1) Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and (2) Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; (3) Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) omitted required federal award information from subawards it issued in the program and did not adequately monitor subrecipients. Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) Context: Seven subawards were selected for testing and the following exceptions were noted: • For seven of seven subawards selected for testing, the FAIN and federal award date were not included on the subaward agreement. • For three of seven subawards selected for testing, the last on-site subrecipient monitoring visits were performed in FY 2020 and the next on-site monitoring is not scheduled to take place until FY 2024. Per the VTrans subrecipient monitoring plan, on-site monitoring must be performed no less than every three years. Cause: Procedures and internal controls were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required federal information. Although VTrans subsequently modified its subaward issuance process, controls in effect during the audit period were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required information. Procedures and internal controls were also not sufficient to ensure that timely on-site monitoring visits were performed in accordance with its monitoring plan. Effect: Excluding the required federal grant award information at the time of subaward issuance may cause subrecipients and their auditors to be uninformed about specific program and other regulations that apply to the funds they receive. There is also the potential for subrecipients to have incomplete Schedules of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in their Single Audit reports. Failure to conduct adequate subrecipient monitoring may result in a failure of VTrans to detect that subawards were used for unauthorized purposes, were managed in violation of the terms and conditions of the subawards, or that subaward performance goals were not achieved. There is an increased risk that subrecipients could be inappropriately spending and/or inaccurately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by VTrans personnel on a timely basis. Questioned costs: Undetermined. Recommendation: VTrans should review and enhance internal controls and procedures to ensure that all required federal award information is included in subawards and that on-site subrecipient monitoring is conducted timely per the terms of its subrecipient monitoring plan. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2023-011 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation State Agency: Agency of Transportation Federal Program: Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit Program Assistance Listing Number: 20.509 Award Number and Year: VT2016-007-02 (9/23/2016 – 6/20/2023), VT-2017-007-01 (8/3/2017 – 6/21/2023), VT-2019-006-01 (9/20/2017 – 9/30/2022), VT-2020-005-00 (5/26/2020 – 9/30/2022), VT-2020-011-00 (9/9/2020 – 9/30/2023), VT-2020-012-00 (9/18/2020 – 9/30/2023), VT-2021-014-01 (9/20/2021 – 9/30/2023), VT-2022-001-02 (5/12/2022 – 6/30/2028) Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance – Per 2 CFR section 200.332, the following requirements are imposed on pass-through entities: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date; (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). (c) Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. (e) Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient (as described in paragraph (b) of this section), the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: (1) Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and (2) Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; (3) Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) omitted required federal award information from subawards it issued in the program and did not adequately monitor subrecipients. Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) Context: Seven subawards were selected for testing and the following exceptions were noted: • For seven of seven subawards selected for testing, the FAIN and federal award date were not included on the subaward agreement. • For three of seven subawards selected for testing, the last on-site subrecipient monitoring visits were performed in FY 2020 and the next on-site monitoring is not scheduled to take place until FY 2024. Per the VTrans subrecipient monitoring plan, on-site monitoring must be performed no less than every three years. Cause: Procedures and internal controls were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required federal information. Although VTrans subsequently modified its subaward issuance process, controls in effect during the audit period were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required information. Procedures and internal controls were also not sufficient to ensure that timely on-site monitoring visits were performed in accordance with its monitoring plan. Effect: Excluding the required federal grant award information at the time of subaward issuance may cause subrecipients and their auditors to be uninformed about specific program and other regulations that apply to the funds they receive. There is also the potential for subrecipients to have incomplete Schedules of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in their Single Audit reports. Failure to conduct adequate subrecipient monitoring may result in a failure of VTrans to detect that subawards were used for unauthorized purposes, were managed in violation of the terms and conditions of the subawards, or that subaward performance goals were not achieved. There is an increased risk that subrecipients could be inappropriately spending and/or inaccurately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by VTrans personnel on a timely basis. Questioned costs: Undetermined. Recommendation: VTrans should review and enhance internal controls and procedures to ensure that all required federal award information is included in subawards and that on-site subrecipient monitoring is conducted timely per the terms of its subrecipient monitoring plan. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Cluster name: TRIO Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 84.042 TRIO—Student Support Services 84.047 TRIO—Upward Bound Award numbers and years: P047A171009, September 1, 2017 through August 31, 2022; P047A170820, September 1, 2017 through August 31, 2023; P042A200873, P042A201342, and P042A200859, September 1, 2020 through August 31, 2025; P047A221154 and P047A221160, September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2027 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Compliance requirement: Eligibility Questioned costs: $5,612 Condition—We identified 2 issues related to eligibility. First, for 2 of the 3 District colleges that administer the TRIO Cluster, the colleges did not review and approve eligibility determinations for 20 of 60 students we tested.1 Specifically, we found that: • For 10 of 28 students tested, GateWay Community College did not independently review and approve its eligibility determinations before awarding students services, contrary to its policies and procedures. • For 10 of 10 students tested, South Mountain Community College did not independently review and approve its eligibility determinations before awarding students services and lacked procedures to do so. Second, contrary to federal regulation, 1 of the 3 District’s colleges that administers the Student Support Services program awarded 6 of 20 students grant aid when the students did not meet eligibility requirements. Specifically, we found that: • For 6 of 20 students it awarded grant aid, GateWay Community College informed us that it incorrectly awarded grant aid totaling $5,612 to these ineligible students because the students did not receive a federal Pell Grant, which is an eligibility criterion to receive grant aid for the Student Support Services program. Effect—Without performing independent reviews and approvals of eligibility determinations that the colleges’ policies and procedures require, GateWay and South Mountain Community Colleges have an increased risk of ineligible students participating in the program. In addition, GateWay Community College could potentially be required to repay to the federal agency the $5,612 of awards it made to ineligible students.2 Cause—GateWay and South Mountain Community Colleges both experienced turnover in key personnel administering the TRIO Cluster. The new personnel at GateWay Community College were not aware of its policies and procedures requiring review and approval of eligibility determinations and grant aid requirements. South Mountain Community College’s policies and procedures did not address review and approval of student records in determining eligibility. Criteria—GateWay Community College’s written policies and procedures require employees to perform an independent review and approval of their student eligibility determinations before awarding students program services (GateWay Community College—TRIO Upward Bound Eligibility Determination and Intake Process). Also, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The District should: 1. Require all the District colleges that administer the TRIO Cluster to follow or update policies and procedures to require an independent and knowledgeable employee to review and approve student eligibility determinations before awarding program services to them. This includes procedures to verify whether students meet all eligibility requirements, including whether they were awarded federal Pell Grants. 2. Train all employees responsible for administering the TRIO programs at the colleges on the District-wide policies and procedures. 3. Work with Gateway Community College and the U.S. Department of Education to resolve the $5,612 in questioned costs. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-105 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 For 22 of the 22 students tested for Mesa Community College, we found that the College performed the eligibility determinations in compliance with federal regulations. 2 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient, the Office, takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521)
Cluster name: TRIO Cluster Assistance Listings numbers and names: 84.042 TRIO—Student Support Services 84.047 TRIO—Upward Bound Award numbers and years: P047A171009, September 1, 2017 through August 31, 2022; P047A170820, September 1, 2017 through August 31, 2023; P042A200873, P042A201342, and P042A200859, September 1, 2020 through August 31, 2025; P047A221154 and P047A221160, September 1, 2022 through August 31, 2027 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Compliance requirement: Eligibility Questioned costs: $5,612 Condition—We identified 2 issues related to eligibility. First, for 2 of the 3 District colleges that administer the TRIO Cluster, the colleges did not review and approve eligibility determinations for 20 of 60 students we tested.1 Specifically, we found that: • For 10 of 28 students tested, GateWay Community College did not independently review and approve its eligibility determinations before awarding students services, contrary to its policies and procedures. • For 10 of 10 students tested, South Mountain Community College did not independently review and approve its eligibility determinations before awarding students services and lacked procedures to do so. Second, contrary to federal regulation, 1 of the 3 District’s colleges that administers the Student Support Services program awarded 6 of 20 students grant aid when the students did not meet eligibility requirements. Specifically, we found that: • For 6 of 20 students it awarded grant aid, GateWay Community College informed us that it incorrectly awarded grant aid totaling $5,612 to these ineligible students because the students did not receive a federal Pell Grant, which is an eligibility criterion to receive grant aid for the Student Support Services program. Effect—Without performing independent reviews and approvals of eligibility determinations that the colleges’ policies and procedures require, GateWay and South Mountain Community Colleges have an increased risk of ineligible students participating in the program. In addition, GateWay Community College could potentially be required to repay to the federal agency the $5,612 of awards it made to ineligible students.2 Cause—GateWay and South Mountain Community Colleges both experienced turnover in key personnel administering the TRIO Cluster. The new personnel at GateWay Community College were not aware of its policies and procedures requiring review and approval of eligibility determinations and grant aid requirements. South Mountain Community College’s policies and procedures did not address review and approval of student records in determining eligibility. Criteria—GateWay Community College’s written policies and procedures require employees to perform an independent review and approval of their student eligibility determinations before awarding students program services (GateWay Community College—TRIO Upward Bound Eligibility Determination and Intake Process). Also, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The District should: 1. Require all the District colleges that administer the TRIO Cluster to follow or update policies and procedures to require an independent and knowledgeable employee to review and approve student eligibility determinations before awarding program services to them. This includes procedures to verify whether students meet all eligibility requirements, including whether they were awarded federal Pell Grants. 2. Train all employees responsible for administering the TRIO programs at the colleges on the District-wide policies and procedures. 3. Work with Gateway Community College and the U.S. Department of Education to resolve the $5,612 in questioned costs. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. This finding is similar to prior-year finding 2022-105 and was initially reported in fiscal year 2022. 1 For 22 of the 22 students tested for Mesa Community College, we found that the College performed the eligibility determinations in compliance with federal regulations. 2 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient, the Office, takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521)
Criteria: CFR 200.332(d) states: All pass-through entities must… monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particulate subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not conform to the agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Condition: The County did not perform subrecipient monitoring of a school district that received the subaward. Cause: The County was not aware of the requirement to monitor the subrecipient. Effect: Unallowed activities could be undertaken or unallowed costs could be claimed under the program. Questioned Costs: None Perspective: Amounts passed through to subrecipients for the year totaled $2,042,606, of which $1,400,000 was passed through to the Sheridan School District which is subject to its own separate audit under the Uniform Guidance. Views of Officials: The County agrees with the findings and will develop a corrective action plan to implement to have all future grant recipients, regardless of whether they are administered by a third party partner or a non-competitive discretionary allocation, be required to register their organization on the County's online portal.