Finding 560562 (2023-003)

Material Weakness
Requirement
I
Questioned Costs
$1
Year
2023
Accepted
2025-05-16

AI Summary

  • Core Issue: The Town did not follow federal procurement rules for a major program expense, relying incorrectly on state exemptions.
  • Impacted Requirements: Noncompliance with 2 CFR Part 200 led to a material weakness in internal controls over federal fund procurement.
  • Recommended Follow-Up: The Town should revise procurement policies, provide staff training, and ensure federal standards are prioritized in future procurements.

Finding Text

Finding 2023-003 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund - AL No. 21.027 U.S. Department of Treasury Noncompliance and Material Weakness Related to Internal Control over Compliance of the Major Program Criteria: Non‐federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. As governmental subrecipients of states they are also required to use the same state procurement policies and procedures for federal funds as for non‐federal funds, the Town is required to follow Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter (MGL) 30(b). MGL 30(b) requires the solicitation of three written or oral quotes for procurements of supplies between $10,000 and $49,999 and sealed bids or proposals for procurements of supplies $50,000 and over. Management of the Town is also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with federal requirements that have a direct and material effect on a federal program. However, A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. Condition and Context: During fiscal year 2023, the Town did not comply with the required procurement policies and procedures in place as it related to one of the expenses charged to the major program. As the expense tested was for engineering services that would have been exempt under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter (MGL) 30(b) (State Procurement Requirement), under federal statutes and procurement requirements for engineering services identified in 2 CFR Part 200, the Town would have been required to go out to bid for the services. Questioned Costs: $413,477.78. Cause: The noncompliance occurred because the organization mistakenly relied on Massachusetts Chapter 30B exemptions, which govern state and local procurements, and did not recognize the need to comply with the more stringent federal procurement requirements for federal fund usage. Staff members were not sufficiently aware of the specific requirements under 2 CFR Part 200 and the precedence of federal procurement regulations over state law in this context. Effect or Potential Effect: There is risk that amounts charged to the federal awards major program may not be in accordance with procurement, suspension, and debarment principles. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: The Town of Bellingham should address the nocompliance and material weakness in internal controls noted above in order to ensure that procurements are conducted in accordance with federal and state requirements. Management Response: We acknowledge the audit finding regarding our reliance on Massachusetts Chapter 30B exemptions for procurement involving federal funds. We understand that federal procurement regulations under 2 CFR Part 200 take precedence over state law and that we failed fully to comply with federal requirements for competitive bidding, sole-source justification, and documentation. We are committed to addressing this issue by reviewing our procurement policies to clearly differentiate between state and federal requirements, ensuring that federal standards govern all procurement involving federal funds. We will provide additional training to staff, implement stronger documentation procedures, and review past procurement to ensure full compliance moving forward.

Corrective Action Plan

Finding 2023-003 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund - AL No. 21.027 U.S. Department of Treasury Noncompliance and Material Weakness Related to Internal Control over Compliance of the Major Program Criteria: Non‐federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. As governmental subrecipients of states they are also required to use the same state procurement policies and procedures for federal funds as for non‐federal funds, the Town is required to follow Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter (MGL) 30(b). MGL 30(b) requires the solicitation of three written or oral quotes for procurements of supplies between $10,000 and $49,999 and sealed bids or proposals for procurements of supplies $50,000 and over. Management of the Town is also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with federal requirements that have a direct and material effect on a federal program. However, A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. Condition and Context: During fiscal year 2023, the Town did not comply with the required procurement policies and procedures in place as it related to one of the expenses charged to the major program. As the expense tested was for engineering services that would have been exempt under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter (MGL) 30(b) (State Procurement Requirement), under federal statutes and procurement requirements for engineering services identified in 2 CFR Part 200, the Town would have been required to go out to bid for the services. Questioned Costs: $413,477.78. Cause: The noncompliance occurred because the organization mistakenly relied on Massachusetts Chapter 30B exemptions, which govern state and local procurements, and did not recognize the need to comply with the more stringent federal procurement requirements for federal fund usage. Staff members were not sufficiently aware of the specific requirements under 2 CFR Part 200 and the precedence of federal procurement regulations over state law in this context. Effect or Potential Effect: There is a risk that amounts charged to federal awards may not be in accordance with procurement, suspension, and debarment principles. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: The Town of Bellingham should address noncompliance and material weaknesses in internal controls noted above in order to ensure that procurements are conducted in accordance with federal and state requirements. Responsible for Corrective Plan: CFO Estimated Completion Date: January 2025 Action Taken: We acknowledge the audit finding regarding our reliance on Massachusetts Chapter 30B exemptions for procurement involving federal funds. We understand that federal procurement regulations under 2 CFR Part 200 take precedence over state law and that we failed fully to comply with federal requirements for competitive bidding, sole-source justification, and documentation. We are committed to addressing this issue by reviewing our procurement policies to clearly differentiate between state and federal requirements, ensuring that federal standards govern all procurement involving federal funds. We will provide additional training to staff, implement stronger documentation procedures, and review past procurement to ensure full compliance moving forward.

Categories

Questioned Costs Procurement, Suspension & Debarment

Other Findings in this Audit

  • 560556 2023-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 560557 2023-002
    - Repeat
  • 560558 2023-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 560559 2023-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 560560 2023-004
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 560561 2023-002
    - Repeat
  • 1136998 2023-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 1136999 2023-002
    - Repeat
  • 1137000 2023-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 1137001 2023-001
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 1137002 2023-004
    Significant Deficiency Repeat
  • 1137003 2023-002
    - Repeat
  • 1137004 2023-003
    Material Weakness

Programs in Audit

ALN Program Name Expenditures
14.228 Community Development Block Grants/state's Program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii $189,944
10.553 School Breakfast Program $140,563
10.555 National School Lunch Program $28,856
21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds $16,555
84.010 Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies $9,797
84.365 English Language Acquisition State Grants $9,391
84.367 Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants (formerly Improving Teacher Quality State Grants) $8,363
84.424 Student Support and Academic Enrichment Program $7,554
84.425 Education Stabilization Fund $3,698
97.036 Disaster Grants - Public Assistance (presidentially Declared Disasters) $3,160
84.027 Special Education Grants to States $326