Finding 24117 (2022-006)

Material Weakness
Requirement
B
Questioned Costs
-
Year
2022
Accepted
2023-04-27
Audit: 20027
Auditor: Kreston Pr LLC

AI Summary

  • Core Issue: There are significant deficiencies in documentation and compliance related to the use of HEERF funds, leading to a material weakness in internal controls.
  • Impacted Requirements: Compliance with 2 CFR 200.302 and 2 CFR 200.303 is lacking, particularly in documenting cost allowability and maintaining effective internal controls.
  • Recommended Follow-Up: Implement formal procedures for documenting transactions and receipts, and conduct a review of lost revenue calculations to ensure compliance with federal guidelines.

Finding Text

Assistance listing program: Education Stabilization Fund - Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF) Assistance Listing Number: 84.425F Award identification number: P425F204999 Award period: September 29, 2020 to June 30, 2023 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-through entity: N/A Category: Internal Control / Compliance Finding Type: Material Weakness Compliance requirement: Allowed Cost / Cost Principles Condition and context In testing compliance and internal controls over cost allowability / cost principles, we selected a sample of ten (10) transactions which amounted to $445,522 of HEERF Institutional aid funds expenditures. Our sample was a statistically valid sample. During our expenditure test, we noted the following deficiencies: a) In one transaction of a sample of ten (10) disbursements (10%) the vendor quote was not available for examination. The transaction amounted to $5,899. The Institution indicated that they followed the micro purchase threshold of $10,000 as defined in 48CFR Part 2, subpart 2.1. However, this determination was not properly documented. b) In two (2) transactions of our sample (20%) the cost per quote did not agree with the amount of the invoice. The amount invoiced in excess of the quote cost was $1,090. c) In three (3) transactions of our sample (30%) we did not find documentation that the equipment was received (date and the employee who received the item). We inquired the Institution?s Management about this matter, and they explained that the Institution does not have a formal procedure or form to document the receipt of goods. Management confirmed and represented us that the items were properly received. d) In one transaction of our sample (10%) the expenditure was related to the amount of lost revenue claimed by the Institution in the fiscal year 2021-22. Upon examination of the Institution analysis, we noted that the lost revenue was not properly determined because the following situations: 1. For the loss of revenue calculation, the Institution used the unaudited figures for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2021. 2. We noted that the Institution considered in its analysis revenue that was not in accordance with the program guidelines (transactions that were not reimbursable under the HEERF grant program). 3. We noted that the lost revenue determined by the Institution was incorrectly determined (lost revenue claimed was understated by approximately $80,000) as result of the net effect of the deficiencies 1 and 2, above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.302 (b) (3) and (7) require records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federally funded activities. These records must contain information pertaining to Federal awards, authorizations, financial obligations, unobligated balances, assets, expenditures, income, and interest and be supported by source documentation. Written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 2 CFR 200.303 (a) to (d) establish that the non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. 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). (b) Comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. (c) Evaluate and monitor the non-Federal entity's compliance with statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of Federal awards. (d) Take prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified including noncompliance identified in audit findings. 2 CFR 200.400 (a) to (d) establish that the application of these cost principles is based on the fundamental premises that: (a) The non-Federal entity is responsible for the efficient and effective administration of the Federal award through the application of sound management practices. (b) The non-Federal entity assumes responsibility for administering Federal funds in a manner consistent with underlying agreements, program objectives, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (c) The non-Federal entity, in recognition of its own unique combination of staff, facilities, and experience, has the primary responsibility for employing whatever form of sound organization and management techniques may be necessary in order to assure proper and efficient administration of the Federal award. (d) The application of these cost principles should require no significant changes in the internal accounting policies and practices of the non-Federal entity. However, the accounting practices of the non-Federal entity must be consistent with these cost principles and support the accumulation of costs as required by the principles and must provide for adequate documentation to support costs charged to the Federal awards. 2 CFR 200.403, related to factors affecting allowability of cost, (c) and (g) establish that except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity, and be adequately documented. 2 CFR 200.404 establishes that a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award; (b) the restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm's-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award; (c) market prices for comparable goods or services for the geographic area; (d) whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government; and (e) whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award's cost. 2 CFR 200.406 (a) establishes that applicable credits refer to those receipts or reduction-of-expenditure-type transactions that offset or reduce expense items allocable to the Federal awards as direct or indirect (F&A) costs. Examples of such transactions are: purchase discounts, rebates or allowances, recoveries or indemnities on losses, insurance refunds or rebates, and adjustments of overpayments or erroneous charges. To the extent that such credits accruing to or received by the non-Federal entity relate to allowable costs, they must be credited to the Federal award either as a cost reduction or cash refund, as appropriate. 2 CFR 200.334 establishes that financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. 2 CFR 200.337 (a) establishes that the Federal awarding agency, Inspectors General, the Comptroller General of the United States, and the pass-through entity, or any of their authorized representatives, must have the right of access to any documents, papers, or other records of the non-Federal entity which are pertinent to the Federal award, in order to make audits, examinations, excerpts, and transcripts. The right also includes timely and reasonable access to the non-Federal entity's personnel for the purpose of interview and discussion related to such documents. The Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF I, II, and III) Lost Revenue Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) published on March 19, 2021, in question number four establishes that sources of lost revenue that are not reimbursable under the HEERF grant programs include the following: capital outlays associated with facilities related to athletics (including fees assessed for capital athletic facility construction), acquisition of real property (including bond revenue), contributions or donations to the institution, marketing or recruitment activities, revenue related to sectarian instruction or religious worship, alcohol sales, and investment income (including endowment and quasi-endowment revenue. Cause The cause of the deficiencies noted were the result of the following situations: a) Lack of written policies and procedures did not provide the Institution?s personnel responsible for the purchasing process a guidance on how to perform and document the purchase transactions under this federal program. b) The vendor invoice was not compared to the quote and no inquiries were made and/or documented explaining the cause of the difference. c) The Institution does not have formal and written procedures to document when materials and/or equipment are received by the Institution?s personnel. d) The Institution management did not consult or requested assistance from the Department of Education program coordinator to ascertain that the request was properly performed and to clarify questions related to the allowable revenue to be considered in the analysis. Also, the Institution failed to review the financial figures of the audited trial balance for 2021. Effect Noncompliance with the above-mentioned requirements could lead to administrative actions by the grantor. It could also be interpreted as a failure to manage federal awards in compliance with laws, regulations, and provisions of contracts and grant agreements. Also, the above conditions could result in the reimbursement of federal funds to the grantors for those disbursements not properly supported and reviewed by the Institution?s management. Questioned costs Refer to finding 2022-010. Identification as a Repeat Finding No repeated finding. Recommendations We recommend the Institution to establish adequate procedures and controls, which shall consider, among others, the following: ? Maintain adequate documentation to support the allowability of its expenditures. ? Purchases must be properly documented to provide the appropriate audit trail of the transactions and allow proper review of the transactions. Adequate documentation should be sufficient to explain the Institution?s analysis and determination. ? Improve its policies and procedures, and internal controls to incorporate the comparison of the vendor invoices with the quotes after the invoice is received to ascertain that expenses and liabilities are properly recorded. Instruct personnel of accounts payable to contact the vendor when discrepancies are identified and document in writing the inquiry performed, the results, and conclusions. ? Implement a formal process with receiving reports or checklist where upon receipt of equipment and/or materials purchased could detail description, amount received, date of receipt, and a reference to the invoice. Copies of the receiving reports and invoices should then be forwarded to the accounting department for processing. Payment of a vendor?s invoice should not be made unless a copy of a receiving report is attached. ? The Institution management should review the Loss of Revenue claims and/or analysis performed by any employee or consultant that was designated to perform such a task. The Institution?s management should verify and ascertain that the analysis performed using the Institution?s financial information agree with the Institution?s audited financial statements. ? The Institution?s management should consult with the US Department of Education program coordinator when questions or concerns arise, especially if management is not familiar with program regulations and/or the federal program is new. Views of Responsible Officials Refer to the Institutional comments included in the Corrective Action Plan.

Corrective Action Plan

Compliance requirement ? Allowed Cost /Cost Principle Institutional Comments on Findings and Recommendations: 1. The institution does not concur with the auditor finding because the referenced transaction was below the "Micro-purchase" threshold and does not require a quotation. The FAR increase the "Micro-purchase" threshold for natural disasters and national emergencies, among others. The invoice amount of $5899 was a continuation of an initial project under this contractor which have the unique security passwords, IT protocols and other IT requirements for the uniform implementation of intelligent classrooms for remote distance education. Accordingly, the institution does not request a quote. The institution followed the referenced guidelines in the determining the allowability of costs. Additionally, an external consultant reviewed the transaction and costs prior to request reimbursement. The 2 CFR Part 200, Appendix XI Compliance Supplement guide, issued April 2022, makes referenced to the FAQ's and Other Guidance containing information pertinent to the compliance requirements described in the document and encouraged auditor to regularly check the HERF Websites for updated FAQ's and other pertinent guidance and reporting information. The institution followed those referenced FAQ's and guidelines, among other sound administration practices, in the use of the grants. The referenced Compliance Supplemental, under "Activities Allowed or Unallowed" states: "Institutions must demonstrate that costs incurred are allowable under the relevant statutory provision and consistent with the purpose of the ESF "to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus"". The institution used $5,899 paid to the guidelines as indicated to contractor, to continue enhancing the distance learning program in preventing the spread and contamination of the coronavirus among professors and students by enabling remote distance education. The direct charges for this transaction to the federal award was for allowable costs under the instructions, federal grant and FAQs guidelines as indicated. 2. The institution does not concur with the auditor finding because of what is discussed in No 1 above. In the two cases mentioned, the cost quote may not agree with the invoice, because of some additional services requested, but the amount of the invoice was the correct amount paid and actual cost used to draw the HEERF funds. These invoices were for furniture and partitions divisions, to enable the remote distance education, avoiding physical contact of students and professors, to prevent, prepare for and respond to the COVID-19 emergency. Once again, these incurred and direct charges to the federal award complied with the HEERF objectives and were allowable costs under the authorized uses in the grant award and HEERF guidelines. 3. The institution does not concur with the auditor finding. The referenced three cases may not have a specific or expressed "acknowledgement of receipt" statement, but the acknowledgement was validated by UTC management and with the signatures when the check was issued. Nevertheless, the costs incurred in these invoices were authorized and incompliance with HEERF program and ESF purpose. The direct charges for this transaction to the federal award was for allowable costs under the instructions, federal grant and FAQs guidelines as indicated. 4. Institution does not, firmly, concurs with the auditor finding. This should not even be a finding because the institution strictly followed the FAQs published on March 19, 2021 to calculate the lost revenue and using a comparison between FY-20 and FY 21. That guideline described "Loss of Revenue" as "...those revenues and institution of higher education otherwise expected but were reduced or eliminated as a result of the novel coronavirus 2910 (COVID-2019) pandemic. As such, lost revenues can only be estimated". Nerveless, the result would have been relatively the same if we have use FY21 audited financials. Given the many factors and complexities of the unusual process, the institution followed a conservative approach and reduced those revenue items that have an increase between fiscal year from those with a loss of revenue. Therefore, the institution netted the potential amount of lost revenue to claim. Accordingly, the net amount resulted in $280,929.84. The potential loss of revenue amount could be greater but the institution decided to only claim the referenced estimated amount. These calculations and analysis were further discussed and evaluated by an officer of the Department of Education, with no recommendation on claiming a higher amount because the amount claimed was less than the estimated potential. The guideline indicates: "Reimbursement for lost revenue is allowable for the Institutional Portion program...". The institution claimed this loss of revenue amount from their institutional portion, complying with the HEERF guidelines and the authorized use of the funds. The direct charges for this transaction to the federal award was for allowable costs under the instructions, federal grant and FAQs guidelines as indicated. a. The institution used unaudited figures for FY21 because the audited financial statements were not completed at the time of the calculation. The institution revised the calculations with the audited financial statements, and the results were the same and the claimed estimated amount did not changed. Once again and in accordance with the guidelines, we were estimating the lost revenue with the data available at the moment. b. The institution followed the recommended HEERF guidelines for this complex and novel exercise. The institution considered under the analysis; those revenues otherwise expected but that were reduced as a result of the novel COVID-2019. The contributions as "Support Revenue" from related entities, which were a significant source of revenue for the institution, was not claimed as loss of revenue. The institution specifically claimed those lost revenue items as authorized in the guidelines. Therefore, once again, the UTC was in compliant with the lost revenue referenced guidelines. The direct charges for this transaction to the federal award was for allowable costs under the instructions, federal grant and FAQs guidelines as indicated. c. As explained above, the institution followed a conservative approach and only claimed a net amount of all lost revenue items. The institution only claimed those estimated revenue items, as authorized in the guideline, that suffer a loss between the two fiscal years considered in the evaluation. This was further evaluated by an officer of the DOE. As the guidelines described, since the lost revenues can only be estimated, the institution correctly, analyzed and calculated the best conservative/reasonable estimate of loss revenue with the available data at the moment. Even if we used the auditors' recommended items, the results would have been the same and no revenue item was claim out of the authorized or allowable costs from the guidelines. The direct charges for this transaction to the federal award was for allowable costs under the instructions, federal grant and FAQs guidelines as indicated. Actions Taken or Planned: The institution understands that the incurred and direct charges to the federal award complied with the HEERF objectives and were allowable costs under the authorized uses in the grant award and HEERF guidelines and no further was required.

Categories

Allowable Costs / Cost Principles Procurement, Suspension & Debarment Equipment & Real Property Management Subrecipient Monitoring

Other Findings in this Audit

  • 24105 2022-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 24106 2022-003
    Material Weakness Repeat
  • 24107 2022-004
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 24108 2022-005
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 24109 2022-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 24110 2022-003
    Material Weakness Repeat
  • 24111 2022-004
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 24112 2022-005
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 24113 2022-002
    Material Weakness
  • 24114 2022-007
    Significant Deficiency
  • 24115 2022-010
    Material Weakness
  • 24116 2022-002
    Material Weakness
  • 24118 2022-007
    Significant Deficiency
  • 24119 2022-008
    Material Weakness
  • 24120 2022-009
    Material Weakness
  • 24121 2022-010
    Material Weakness
  • 600547 2022-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 600548 2022-003
    Material Weakness Repeat
  • 600549 2022-004
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 600550 2022-005
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 600551 2022-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 600552 2022-003
    Material Weakness Repeat
  • 600553 2022-004
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 600554 2022-005
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 600555 2022-002
    Material Weakness
  • 600556 2022-007
    Significant Deficiency
  • 600557 2022-010
    Material Weakness
  • 600558 2022-002
    Material Weakness
  • 600559 2022-006
    Material Weakness
  • 600560 2022-007
    Significant Deficiency
  • 600561 2022-008
    Material Weakness
  • 600562 2022-009
    Material Weakness
  • 600563 2022-010
    Material Weakness

Programs in Audit

ALN Program Name Expenditures
84.268 Federal Direct Student Loans $707,037
84.425 Covid 19 - Education Stabilization Fund $487,617
84.063 Federal Pell Grant Program $-6,874