Finding 565338 (2024-002)

Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Department – U.S. Department of Justice Pass-through Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 15JOVW-21-GG-00543-STOP and 2021 15JOVW-22-GG-00422-STOP and 2022 Violence Against Women Formula Grants, Federal Assistance Listing #16.588 County Department – State’s Attorney Office Finding 2024 – 002 CRITERIA 2 CFR Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Subpart D—Post Federal Award Requirements Standards for Financial and Program Management, Section 200.303 Internal controls states, “the recipient and subrecipient must: (a) Establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient or subrecipient is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” Section 200.332. Requirements for pass-through entities, requires that “A pass-through entity must: (c) Evaluate each subrecipient's fraud risk and risk of noncompliance with a subaward to determine the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraph (f) of this section. When evaluating a subrecipient's risk, a pass-through entity should consider the following: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits. This includes considering whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with subpart F and the extent to which the same or similar subawards have 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 any Federal agency monitoring (for example, if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from the Federal agency)... (e) 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:(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 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. (3) 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 § 200.521.(4)Resolve audit findings specifically related to the subaward…. (g)Verify that a subrecipient is audited as required by subpart F of this part. (h) Consider whether the results of a subrecipient's audit, site visits, or other monitoring necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity's records. (i) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in § 200.339 and in program regulations. CONDITION During the current audit period, the Cook County State’s Attorney Office (SAO) did not adequately comply with its subrecipient monitoring requirements as required by Federal regulations. CAUSE Based on discussions with management, the cause of this finding was an inadequate understanding of sub-recipient monitoring policies and best practices. While the Department believed at the time that they were in compliance with the applicable monitoring requirements, they now recognize that their efforts did not fully meet the necessary standards. EFFECT Failure to adequately perform and document the risk assessments on its subrecipient(s) could result in the inadequate monitoring of the activities and performance of a subrecipient. Also, this could result in Federal awards being used by the subrecipient for unauthorized purposes. QUESTIONED COSTS None. CONTEXT During our review of two (2) subrecipients (of a population of 4 subrecipients), we noted the following:  For both subrecipients, we noted documentation was not maintained to support SAO’s evaluation of the subrecipients’ risk of noncompliance and the frequency of monitoring to be conducted by SAO based on the assessed risk.  We also noted for both subrecipients, no documentation was provided to verify whether the subrecipients were required to have a Single Audit conducted, including SAO’s review of the report, and if applicable, issuance of a management decision on audit findings noted as required by 2 CFR 200.332e(3).  The SAO utilized a “Subrecipient Monitoring Checklist” (Checklist) to conduct and document its monitoring of subrecipients. Based on review, we noted the Checklist does not include evidence of who completed the monitoring, the date the actual monitoring was performed nor the subrecipient personnel with whom the monitoring results were discussed during the site visit. Also, the Checklist appears to be inaccurately completed. Specifically, we noted the Checklist noted that the results include expected corrective actions and dates for resolution. However, there was no finding or issues noted in the formal letter submitted to the subrecipient(s) after the site visit(s). IDENTIFICATION OF REPEATED FINDINGS None. RECOMMENDATION We recommend SAO implement procedures to ensure adequate documentation is maintained to support the evaluation of each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance and review of the Single audit report, as required by Federal regulations. Also, we suggest that the Checklist be accurately prepared and updated to include evidence of who completed the monitoring, the date the actual monitoring was performed, and the subrecipient personnel with whom the monitoring results were discussed during the site visit. VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS AND PLANNED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS The County agrees with the finding and recommendation. The County’s corrective action plan is on pages 38-39.