Finding Text
Reference Number: 2022–007 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-through Agency: Various Federal Program: The Food Distribution Cluster ALN Number: Various Compliance Requirement: Allowable Cost Type of Finding: Material Weakness, Non-compliance Criteria or specific requirement: In accordance with 200.502(g), Federal non-cash assistance food commodities received as part of a Federal award to carry out a Federal program must be valued at fair market value at the time of receipt or the assessed value provided by the Federal agency and must be included in determining Federal awards expended under this part. Condition: We selected 60 food commodity delivery receipts to sub-recipients (Sub – ERA’s) for testing; 16 selections did not have evidence of review. The delivery receipt includes the quantity of the food commodities distributed to sub-recipients. The monetary value of those food commodities is included in the SEFA. We also made 2 sign-in-sheet selections which contained the quantity of food commodity items that were distributed which were then used to populate the SEFA. The 2 sign-in-sheet selections did not have evidence of review. Further, out of the 60 selections tested for allowable costs, 13 selections pertaining to the food commodities did not have adequate support. As the food commodity distribution support did not include the weight of the commodities distributed, management used estimated weight of the food commodities rather than the actual weight of the items. The estimated weight of the food distributed was then converted to monetary value by multiplying it by a rate per pound which was calculated using data from the pass-through agencies, when recording on the SEFA. One of the selections had a difference of 10 boxes distributed between what was recorded on the SEFA and what was reflected on the underlying support. Cause: Management was not aware that evidence pertaining to the of review of the distribution of the food commodity items and the associated weight of those items was required to be maintained. Effect: Lack of sufficient and appropriate recordkeeping can lead to food theft or misuse as well as incorrect information being communicated to the grantor which may lead to the eventual cessation of grant funding. Questioned Costs: None. Recommendation: We recommend that management takes steps to ensure that proper evidence of review is maintained. Further, management should ensure proper documentation of the weight of items distributed is retained. Views of responsible officials: See Corrective Action Plan.