EIN: 016000018
UEI: T33MAJLE1MJ3
Audited by: Runyon Kersteen Ouellette
Oversight agency: 84 [Department of Education]
View federal awards & risk assessment →
Data as of August 28, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on October 27, 2025. Under 2 CFR 200.521(d), a pass-through entity that provided federal funds to this organization for this audit period must issue a management decision on these findings by April 27, 2026 (126 days ago).
What is a management decision? →During the audit of the SLFRF program, it was noted that the City submitted expenditure reports containing inaccurate financial data. Several reported amounts did not reconcile with the underlying accounting records, resulting in material misstatements in the quarterly project and expenditure reports submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Cause: The inaccuracies were primarily due to the volume and complexity of City projects funded under the CSLFRF program. The decentralized nature of project management and reporting across departments contributed to challenges in compiling accurate and complete expenditure data. Effect: Inaccurate reporting may impair transparency and accountability and could affect future oversight actions by the federal awarding agency. Recommendation: We recommend that the City enhance its internal controls over SLFRF reporting by implementing centralized review procedures, improving coordination among departments, and providing additional training to staff responsible for compiling and submitting expenditure reports. We also recommend a secondary review of the reported encumbrances and expenditures by an individual in the accounting department before the report is transmitted to the Treasury. Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2024-006 U.S. Department of the Treasury, For the period July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024, Assistance Listing #21.027 – Internal Controls over State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: As a recipient of State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLRF), the City is required to submit quarterly Project and Expenditure Reports to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. These submissions report cumulative and quarterly obligations and expenditures by project, project income, and subaward and vendor information. Condition: During the audit of the SLFRF program, it was noted that the City submitted expenditure reports containing inaccurate financial data. Several reported amounts did not reconcile with the underlying accounting records, resulting in material misstatements in the quarterly project and expenditure reports submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Cause: The inaccuracies were primarily due to the volume and complexity of City projects funded under the CSLFRF program. The decentralized nature of project management and reporting across departments contributed to challenges in compiling accurate and complete expenditure data. Effect: Inaccurate reporting may impair transparency and accountability and could affect future oversight actions by the federal awarding agency. Recommendation: We recommend that the City enhance its internal controls over SLFRF reporting by implementing centralized review procedures, improving coordination among departments, and providing additional training to staff responsible for compiling and submitting expenditure reports. We also recommend a secondary review of the reported encumbrances and expenditures by an individual in the accounting department before the report is transmitted to the Treasury. Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Additional reports will be run to verify totals before filings of quarterly reports, paying particular attention to end of year and the needed reversal of the prior year payroll accrual. Errors found in reports will be corrected in subsequent records as allowable under Department of Treasury grant reporting guidelines.
2023-006
Of the six contracts tested under the SLFRF program: • Three contracts lacked documentation demonstrating that appropriate bidding procedures were followed or that a cost or price analysis was performed prior to award. • Two contracts had no evidence that suspension and debarment procedures were followed, such as checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) or obtaining certifications from contractors. Cause: The City’s procurement documentation practices were inconsistent across departments. The high volume of SLFRF-funded projects and decentralized contract management contributed to lapses in maintaining required procurement records and verifying contractor eligibility. Effect: The City did not comply with federal procurement standards, increasing the risk of awarding contracts to ineligible vendors, procuring contracts with unfavorable terms, and potentially incurring unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend the City strengthen its procurement procedures by: • Ensuring all departments consistently document bidding processes and cost/price analyses. • Implementing centralized oversight or checklists to verify compliance with suspension and debarment requirements. • Providing targeted training to procurement staff on federal requirements under the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2024-007 U.S. Department of the Treasury, For the period July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024, Assistance Listing #21.027 – Internal Controls over State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: As required under 2 CFR §200.320, the City must follow Federal procurement standards to ensure contracts are procured at the lowest price and with adequate competition. In addition, as required by 2 CFR §180.300, the City is not allowed to use grant funds to contract with vendors who are suspended or disbarred from receiving Federal funds. Condition: Of the six contracts tested under the SLFRF program: • Three contracts lacked documentation demonstrating that appropriate bidding procedures were followed or that a cost or price analysis was performed prior to award. • Two contracts had no evidence that suspension and debarment procedures were followed, such as checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) or obtaining certifications from contractors. Cause: The City’s procurement documentation practices were inconsistent across departments. The high volume of SLFRF-funded projects and decentralized contract management contributed to lapses in maintaining required procurement records and verifying contractor eligibility. Effect: The City did not comply with federal procurement standards, increasing the risk of awarding contracts to ineligible vendors, procuring contracts with unfavorable terms, and potentially incurring unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend the City strengthen its procurement procedures by: • Ensuring all departments consistently document bidding processes and cost/price analyses. • Implementing centralized oversight or checklists to verify compliance with suspension and debarment requirements. • Providing targeted training to procurement staff on federal requirements under the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Prior to any purchase orders being issued, we will ensure that bidding procedures have taken place and that SAM.gov has been reviewed and documentation is attached.
The City submitted the required PR-29 Cash on Hand Quarterly Reports late for all quarters reviewed. Specifically, all quarterly reports were submitted after the 30-day deadline following the end of the reporting period. Additionally, the beginning balance of program income was reported incorrectly for all quarters reviewed, resulting in inaccurate financial reporting to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In addition, we found there was no secondary review of either the PR-29 Cash on Hand Quarterly Report or the PR-26 Financial Summary Report. Cause: The delays and inaccuracies were due to insufficient oversight, a lack of formalized timelines for report preparation and submission, staff turnover, and inadequate reconciliation of balances prior to report completion. Effect: The City did not comply with HUD’s reporting requirements for the PR-29 Cash on Hand Quarterly Report, which may impair program oversight and transparency. Late and inaccurate reporting can hinder HUD’s ability to monitor program performance and financial management. In addition, lack of review procedures increases the risk of untimely or inaccurate reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the City: • Establish and enforce internal deadlines to ensure timely submission of required reports. • Implement a reconciliation and review process to verify the accuracy of reported balances prior to submission. • Provide training to staff responsible for preparing and reviewing HUD reports to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Questioned Costs: none
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2024-008 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, For the period July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024, ALN # 14.218 – Internal Controls over Community Development Block Grant Entitlements Cluster Criteria: Federal regulations require grantees to maintain accurate financial records and submit timely reports. Specifically, HUD guidance for the PR-29 Cash on Hand Quarterly Report requires submission within 30 days of the end of each quarter and accurate reporting of program income balances. In addition, Uniform Guidance requires the City to have adequate internal controls over grant management. Condition: The City submitted the required PR-29 Cash on Hand Quarterly Reports late for all quarters reviewed. Specifically, all quarterly reports were submitted after the 30-day deadline following the end of the reporting period. Additionally, the beginning balance of program income was reported incorrectly for all quarters reviewed, resulting in inaccurate financial reporting to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In addition, we found there was no secondary review of either the PR-29 Cash on Hand Quarterly Report or the PR-26 Financial Summary Report. Cause: The delays and inaccuracies were due to insufficient oversight, a lack of formalized timelines for report preparation and submission, staff turnover, and inadequate reconciliation of balances prior to report completion. Effect: The City did not comply with HUD’s reporting requirements for the PR-29 Cash on Hand Quarterly Report, which may impair program oversight and transparency. Late and inaccurate reporting can hinder HUD’s ability to monitor program performance and financial management. In addition, lack of review procedures increases the risk of untimely or inaccurate reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the City: • Establish and enforce internal deadlines to ensure timely submission of required reports. • Implement a reconciliation and review process to verify the accuracy of reported balances prior to submission. • Provide training to staff responsible for preparing and reviewing HUD reports to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Questioned Costs: none
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Internal deadlines have been revised to ensure timely submission of all required reports. For the PR-29 specifically, there are instances where the review date replaced the actual submission time-stamp date in the system making it appear it was submitted after the deadline when it was merely reviewed again after submission. This is a result of the HUD system the city has no capability of changing. Staff have been trained on the correct process, and this training will also be provided to any new staff involved in preparing or submitting these reports.
There was no internal control process in place to ensure the monthly claim details are reviewed prior to submission to the CNPWeb system. A new control process has been created for fiscal year 2025, but this was not in place during fiscal year 2024. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a procedure to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may be incorrect and may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department follow their newly established policies and procedures for fiscal year 2025 to ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2024-009 U.S. Department of Agriculture, For the period July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024, Assistance Listing #10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, and 10.582 - Internal Controls over Child Nutrition Cluster Criteria: The School Department receives federal reimbursement for free and reduced price meals provided to children at established reimbursement rates. Monthly claims for reimbursement must be based on lunch counts taken daily at the point of service, which correctly identify the number of free, reduced price, and paid lunches served to eligible students. Condition: There was no internal control process in place to ensure the monthly claim details are reviewed prior to submission to the CNPWeb system. A new control process has been created for fiscal year 2025, but this was not in place during fiscal year 2024. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a procedure to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may be incorrect and may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department follow their newly established policies and procedures for fiscal year 2025 to ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Effective November 2024, a new procedure is in place to verify school lunch counts are reported accurately. The School Nutrition Director documents data in spreadsheets and uses this for completing reimbursement requests. The Business Manager also reviews the provided spreadsheets before approving claims for reimbursement.
2023-007
During the audit period, it was noted that the City failed to retain documentation of pre-rehabilitation inspection reports for multiple CDBG-funded rehabilitation projects. These reports are essential to verify the initial condition of the properties and to support the justification for the scope of work and use of federal funds. Cause: The missing documentation was attributed to staff turnover within the City. Key personnel responsible for maintaining and organizing project files departed during the project period, and adequate transition procedures were not in place to ensure continuity of recordkeeping. Effect: Although formal pre-rehabilitation inspection reports were not retained, there was evidence that inspections were conducted. Specifically, deficiencies identified during inspections were incorporated into the scope of work outlined in the City’s contract with the grant recipient. However, the absence of formal documentation limits the ability to fully verify compliance with federal recordkeeping requirements and may result in questioned costs if eligibility cannot be clearly substantiated. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure consistent documentation of preliminary inspections, including standardized templates and centralized digital storage. Staff should be cross-trained, and transition protocols should be established to maintain continuity during personnel changes. The City should ensure future inspections are properly recorded and retained. Questioned Costs: none
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2024-010 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, For the period July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024, ALN # 14.218 – Internal Controls over Community Development Block Grant Entitlements Cluster Criteria: In accordance with 24 CFR § 570.506, when CDBG and CDBG-CV funds are used for rehabilitation, the grantee must ensure the work is properly completed in accordance with applicable laws, codes and other requirements relating to housing safety, quality, or habitability. Pre-rehabilitation inspections are conducted to identify the deficiencies to be corrected. Deficiencies noted in the pre-rehabilitation inspections are required to be incorporated into the rehabilitation contract. Condition: During the audit period, it was noted that the City failed to retain documentation of pre-rehabilitation inspection reports for multiple CDBG-funded rehabilitation projects. These reports are essential to verify the initial condition of the properties and to support the justification for the scope of work and use of federal funds. Cause: The missing documentation was attributed to staff turnover within the City. Key personnel responsible for maintaining and organizing project files departed during the project period, and adequate transition procedures were not in place to ensure continuity of recordkeeping. Effect: Although formal pre-rehabilitation inspection reports were not retained, there was evidence that inspections were conducted. Specifically, deficiencies identified during inspections were incorporated into the scope of work outlined in the City’s contract with the grant recipient. However, the absence of formal documentation limits the ability to fully verify compliance with federal recordkeeping requirements and may result in questioned costs if eligibility cannot be clearly substantiated. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure consistent documentation of preliminary inspections, including standardized templates and centralized digital storage. Staff should be cross-trained, and transition protocols should be established to maintain continuity during personnel changes. The City should ensure future inspections are properly recorded and retained. Questioned Costs: none
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: During the audit period, the City was in the process of transitioning to a virtual inspection and project management platform designed to retain inspection reports, photographs, and supporting documentation in a centralized and permanent digital file. This system is now in place and used for all HUD activity record keeping assuring records are consistently documented and readily accessible for compliance and monitoring purposes. Following the audit period, the City ultimately discontinued direct administration of housing rehabilitation programs under the CDBG entitlement. As a result, the risk of missing pre-rehabilitation inspection documentation for City-managed activities has been eliminated.
The City did not perform a documented risk assessment of subrecipients under the HOME program to determine the appropriate level and type of monitoring. Additionally, the City did not obtain or review subrecipients’ Single Audit reports to identify and follow up on any findings related to the HOME program. Two of the four contracts with expenditures in fiscal year 2024 were tested. Cause: The City has not established formal procedures to assess subrecipient risk or to review and follow up on audit findings related to the HOME program. Effect: Without a documented risk assessment and review of subrecipient audit reports: • The City may not tailor its monitoring procedures appropriately, increasing the risk of undetected noncompliance. • Potential issues identified in subrecipient audits may go unaddressed, jeopardizing the integrity of the program and federal funding. Recommendation: The City should implement formal procedures to conduct and document risk assessments for all subrecipients of the HOME program, obtain and review subrecipient Single Audit reports annually, follow up on any findings related to the HOME program to ensure corrective actions are taken. Questioned Costs: none
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2024-011 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, For the period July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024, ALN # 14.239– HOME Investment Partnerships Program Criteria: Per 2 CFR §200.331(b), pass-through entities must 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. Furthermore, 2 CFR §200.332(d) requires pass-through entities to follow up on any audit findings identified in subrecipients’ Single Audit reports that pertain to the federal award. Condition: The City did not perform a documented risk assessment of subrecipients under the HOME program to determine the appropriate level and type of monitoring. Additionally, the City did not obtain or review subrecipients’ Single Audit reports to identify and follow up on any findings related to the HOME program. Two of the four contracts with expenditures in fiscal year 2024 were tested. Cause: The City has not established formal procedures to assess subrecipient risk or to review and follow up on audit findings related to the HOME program. Effect: Without a documented risk assessment and review of subrecipient audit reports: • The City may not tailor its monitoring procedures appropriately, increasing the risk of undetected noncompliance. • Potential issues identified in subrecipient audits may go unaddressed, jeopardizing the integrity of the program and federal funding. Recommendation: The City should implement formal procedures to conduct and document risk assessments for all subrecipients of the HOME program, obtain and review subrecipient Single Audit reports annually, follow up on any findings related to the HOME program to ensure corrective actions are taken. Questioned Costs: none
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: During the audit period, the City monitored subrecipient performance through the review of required supporting documentation submitted with each individual fund requisition and draw request. This process provided assurance that costs charged to the program were eligible and supported. The City also self identified one instance within this process where a consortium member subrecipient did not complete a Single Audit as required. City staff consulted with HUD on this matter and were advised by HUD staff to continue processing payments while HUD worked directly with the subrecipient to bring them back into compliance.
FAC accepted this audit on October 18, 2024 — management decision was due April 18, 2025.
We tested 10 of the 39 SLRF projects reported on the quarterly ARPA reports to determine whether cumulative and quarterly expenditures reconcile with the accounting system. We found errors in 4 of the 10 reports: • one project failed to include the reversal of the prior year payroll accrual totaling $1,385, causing that expense to be double-counted; • three projects reported a total of $374,811 of expenditures when the purchase order was approved; however the service had not been performed and the expenditure had not yet been realized. These items were properly reported as obligations but should not have been reported as expenditures. Cause: The project spreadsheets developed to track cumulative and quarterly expenditures do not separately track obligations. In addition, there is no secondary review by a member of the Finance Department to double check the data in the reports. As a result, errors in reporting remain undetected. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: We recommend revising the City’s project tracking spreadsheets to include columns to separately track purchase orders. This will ensure expenses aren’t confused with obligations. We also recommend a member of the Finance Department review and approve the report before it is submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-006 U.S. Department of the Treasury, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, Assistance Listing #21.027 – Internal Controls over State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: As a recipient of State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLRF), the City is required to submit quarterly Project and Expenditure Reports to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. These submissions report cumulative and quarterly obligations and expenditures by project, subaward and vendor information, and revenue replacement information. Condition: We tested 10 of the 39 SLRF projects reported on the quarterly ARPA reports to determine whether cumulative and quarterly expenditures reconcile with the accounting system. We found errors in 4 of the 10 reports: • one project failed to include the reversal of the prior year payroll accrual totaling $1,385, causing that expense to be double-counted; • three projects reported a total of $374,811 of expenditures when the purchase order was approved; however the service had not been performed and the expenditure had not yet been realized. These items were properly reported as obligations but should not have been reported as expenditures. Cause: The project spreadsheets developed to track cumulative and quarterly expenditures do not separately track obligations. In addition, there is no secondary review by a member of the Finance Department to double check the data in the reports. As a result, errors in reporting remain undetected. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: We recommend revising the City’s project tracking spreadsheets to include columns to separately track purchase orders. This will ensure expenses aren’t confused with obligations. We also recommend a member of the Finance Department review and approve the report before it is submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Additional reports will be run to verify totals before filings of quarterly reports, paying particular attention to end of year and the needed reversal of the prior year payroll accrual. Errors found in reports will be corrected in subsequent records as allowable under Department of Treasury grant reporting guidelines.
We tested 10 of the 39 SLRF projects reported on the quarterly ARPA reports to determine whether cumulative and quarterly expenditures reconcile with the accounting system. We found errors in 4 of the 10 reports: • one project failed to include the reversal of the prior year payroll accrual totaling $1,385, causing that expense to be double-counted; • three projects reported a total of $374,811 of expenditures when the purchase order was approved; however the service had not been performed and the expenditure had not yet been realized. These items were properly reported as obligations but should not have been reported as expenditures. Cause: The project spreadsheets developed to track cumulative and quarterly expenditures do not separately track obligations. In addition, there is no secondary review by a member of the Finance Department to double check the data in the reports. As a result, errors in reporting remain undetected. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: We recommend revising the City’s project tracking spreadsheets to include columns to separately track purchase orders. This will ensure expenses aren’t confused with obligations. We also recommend a member of the Finance Department review and approve the report before it is submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-006 U.S. Department of the Treasury, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, Assistance Listing #21.027 – Internal Controls over State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: As a recipient of State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLRF), the City is required to submit quarterly Project and Expenditure Reports to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. These submissions report cumulative and quarterly obligations and expenditures by project, subaward and vendor information, and revenue replacement information. Condition: We tested 10 of the 39 SLRF projects reported on the quarterly ARPA reports to determine whether cumulative and quarterly expenditures reconcile with the accounting system. We found errors in 4 of the 10 reports: • one project failed to include the reversal of the prior year payroll accrual totaling $1,385, causing that expense to be double-counted; • three projects reported a total of $374,811 of expenditures when the purchase order was approved; however the service had not been performed and the expenditure had not yet been realized. These items were properly reported as obligations but should not have been reported as expenditures. Cause: The project spreadsheets developed to track cumulative and quarterly expenditures do not separately track obligations. In addition, there is no secondary review by a member of the Finance Department to double check the data in the reports. As a result, errors in reporting remain undetected. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: We recommend revising the City’s project tracking spreadsheets to include columns to separately track purchase orders. This will ensure expenses aren’t confused with obligations. We also recommend a member of the Finance Department review and approve the report before it is submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Additional reports will be run to verify totals before filings of quarterly reports, paying particular attention to end of year and the needed reversal of the prior year payroll accrual. Errors found in reports will be corrected in subsequent records as allowable under Department of Treasury grant reporting guidelines.
The April claim reimbursement form overstated breakfast meal counts by 1,000 meals, which comprised 7% of total meals claimed. In addition, operational and administrative payroll costs charged to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program were based on estimated hours worked, rather than actual time and effort records. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a policy to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. In addition, the School Department does not have policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that payroll charges to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Unsupported payroll charges may not meet cost principal requirements resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department establish policies and procedures that ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. We also recommend that policies and procedures be established to ensure employees allocating their time to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program complete documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i). Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-007 U.S. Department of Agriculture, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, Assistance Listing #10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, and 10.582 - Internal Controls over Child Nutrition Cluster Criteria: The School Department receives federal reimbursement for free and reduced price meals provided to children at established reimbursement rates. Monthly claims for reimbursement must be based on lunch counts taken daily at the point of service, which correctly identify the number of free, reduced price, and paid lunches served to eligible students. In addition, the School Department participates in the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program which provides reimbursement of fresh fruit and vegetable purchases and related operational program costs. Charges for salaries and wages to the program must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: The April claim reimbursement form overstated breakfast meal counts by 1,000 meals, which comprised 7% of total meals claimed. In addition, operational and administrative payroll costs charged to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program were based on estimated hours worked, rather than actual time and effort records. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a policy to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. In addition, the School Department does not have policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that payroll charges to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Unsupported payroll charges may not meet cost principal requirements resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department establish policies and procedures that ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. We also recommend that policies and procedures be established to ensure employees allocating their time to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program complete documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i). Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Going forward the School Nutrition staff will keep a spreadsheet documenting meals reimbursed previous fiscal years, and in each month to compare to the number of meals calculated for the current billing month.
The April claim reimbursement form overstated breakfast meal counts by 1,000 meals, which comprised 7% of total meals claimed. In addition, operational and administrative payroll costs charged to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program were based on estimated hours worked, rather than actual time and effort records. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a policy to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. In addition, the School Department does not have policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that payroll charges to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Unsupported payroll charges may not meet cost principal requirements resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department establish policies and procedures that ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. We also recommend that policies and procedures be established to ensure employees allocating their time to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program complete documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i). Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-007 U.S. Department of Agriculture, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, Assistance Listing #10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, and 10.582 - Internal Controls over Child Nutrition Cluster Criteria: The School Department receives federal reimbursement for free and reduced price meals provided to children at established reimbursement rates. Monthly claims for reimbursement must be based on lunch counts taken daily at the point of service, which correctly identify the number of free, reduced price, and paid lunches served to eligible students. In addition, the School Department participates in the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program which provides reimbursement of fresh fruit and vegetable purchases and related operational program costs. Charges for salaries and wages to the program must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: The April claim reimbursement form overstated breakfast meal counts by 1,000 meals, which comprised 7% of total meals claimed. In addition, operational and administrative payroll costs charged to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program were based on estimated hours worked, rather than actual time and effort records. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a policy to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. In addition, the School Department does not have policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that payroll charges to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Unsupported payroll charges may not meet cost principal requirements resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department establish policies and procedures that ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. We also recommend that policies and procedures be established to ensure employees allocating their time to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program complete documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i). Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Going forward the School Nutrition staff will keep a spreadsheet documenting meals reimbursed previous fiscal years, and in each month to compare to the number of meals calculated for the current billing month.
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, the City requested $21,212 of CDBG grant funds even though sufficient program income was available to cover those costs. Cause: Internal controls over the CDBG grant program are insufficient to ensure grant funds are only drawn when program income is insufficient to cover program costs. Effect: Since program income exceeded allowable costs in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, there were no eligible costs for grant reimbursement. As a result, Federal funds were drawn to reimburse unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend grant management staff review their grant drawdown procedures to ensure program income is reviewed prior to drawing new grant funds. Known Questioned Costs: $21,212.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-008 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, ALN # 14.218 – Internal Controls over Community Development Block Grant Entitlements Cluster Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.307(e), program income must be deducted from total allowable costs to determine net allowable costs. Program income must be used for current costs unless the Federal awarding agency authorizes otherwise. Condition: In the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, the City requested $21,212 of CDBG grant funds even though sufficient program income was available to cover those costs. Cause: Internal controls over the CDBG grant program are insufficient to ensure grant funds are only drawn when program income is insufficient to cover program costs. Effect: Since program income exceeded allowable costs in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, there were no eligible costs for grant reimbursement. As a result, Federal funds were drawn to reimburse unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend grant management staff review their grant drawdown procedures to ensure program income is reviewed prior to drawing new grant funds. Known Questioned Costs: $21,212.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: The Community Development and Finance Departments acknowledge that EN funds were drawn when it appeared that PI funds were available. The finding was partly influenced by the nature of first quarter draws and the need to record prior year expenses. We have corrected the discrepancy and to address this in the future, we plan to implement a balance sheet account to better track PI balances and expenditures.
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, the City requested $21,212 of CDBG grant funds even though sufficient program income was available to cover those costs. Cause: Internal controls over the CDBG grant program are insufficient to ensure grant funds are only drawn when program income is insufficient to cover program costs. Effect: Since program income exceeded allowable costs in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, there were no eligible costs for grant reimbursement. As a result, Federal funds were drawn to reimburse unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend grant management staff review their grant drawdown procedures to ensure program income is reviewed prior to drawing new grant funds. Known Questioned Costs: $21,212.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-008 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, ALN # 14.218 – Internal Controls over Community Development Block Grant Entitlements Cluster Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.307(e), program income must be deducted from total allowable costs to determine net allowable costs. Program income must be used for current costs unless the Federal awarding agency authorizes otherwise. Condition: In the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, the City requested $21,212 of CDBG grant funds even though sufficient program income was available to cover those costs. Cause: Internal controls over the CDBG grant program are insufficient to ensure grant funds are only drawn when program income is insufficient to cover program costs. Effect: Since program income exceeded allowable costs in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, there were no eligible costs for grant reimbursement. As a result, Federal funds were drawn to reimburse unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend grant management staff review their grant drawdown procedures to ensure program income is reviewed prior to drawing new grant funds. Known Questioned Costs: $21,212.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: The Community Development and Finance Departments acknowledge that EN funds were drawn when it appeared that PI funds were available. The finding was partly influenced by the nature of first quarter draws and the need to record prior year expenses. We have corrected the discrepancy and to address this in the future, we plan to implement a balance sheet account to better track PI balances and expenditures.
FAC accepted this audit on October 25, 2024 — management decision was due April 25, 2025.
We tested 10 of the 39 SLRF projects reported on the quarterly ARPA reports to determine whether cumulative and quarterly expenditures reconcile with the accounting system. We found errors in 4 of the 10 reports: • one project failed to include the reversal of the prior year payroll accrual totaling $1,385, causing that expense to be double-counted; • three projects reported a total of $374,811 of expenditures when the purchase order was approved; however the service had not been performed and the expenditure had not yet been realized. These items were properly reported as obligations but should not have been reported as expenditures. Cause: The project spreadsheets developed to track cumulative and quarterly expenditures do not separately track obligations. In addition, there is no secondary review by a member of the Finance Department to double check the data in the reports. As a result, errors in reporting remain undetected. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: We recommend revising the City’s project tracking spreadsheets to include columns to separately track purchase orders. This will ensure expenses aren’t confused with obligations. We also recommend a member of the Finance Department review and approve the report before it is submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-006 U.S. Department of the Treasury, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, Assistance Listing #21.027 – Internal Controls over State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: As a recipient of State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLRF), the City is required to submit quarterly Project and Expenditure Reports to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. These submissions report cumulative and quarterly obligations and expenditures by project, subaward and vendor information, and revenue replacement information. Condition: We tested 10 of the 39 SLRF projects reported on the quarterly ARPA reports to determine whether cumulative and quarterly expenditures reconcile with the accounting system. We found errors in 4 of the 10 reports: • one project failed to include the reversal of the prior year payroll accrual totaling $1,385, causing that expense to be double-counted; • three projects reported a total of $374,811 of expenditures when the purchase order was approved; however the service had not been performed and the expenditure had not yet been realized. These items were properly reported as obligations but should not have been reported as expenditures. Cause: The project spreadsheets developed to track cumulative and quarterly expenditures do not separately track obligations. In addition, there is no secondary review by a member of the Finance Department to double check the data in the reports. As a result, errors in reporting remain undetected. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: We recommend revising the City’s project tracking spreadsheets to include columns to separately track purchase orders. This will ensure expenses aren’t confused with obligations. We also recommend a member of the Finance Department review and approve the report before it is submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Additional reports will be run to verify totals before filings of quarterly reports, paying particular attention to end of year and the needed reversal of the prior year payroll accrual. Errors found in reports will be corrected in subsequent records as allowable under Department of Treasury grant reporting guidelines.
We tested 10 of the 39 SLRF projects reported on the quarterly ARPA reports to determine whether cumulative and quarterly expenditures reconcile with the accounting system. We found errors in 4 of the 10 reports: • one project failed to include the reversal of the prior year payroll accrual totaling $1,385, causing that expense to be double-counted; • three projects reported a total of $374,811 of expenditures when the purchase order was approved; however the service had not been performed and the expenditure had not yet been realized. These items were properly reported as obligations but should not have been reported as expenditures. Cause: The project spreadsheets developed to track cumulative and quarterly expenditures do not separately track obligations. In addition, there is no secondary review by a member of the Finance Department to double check the data in the reports. As a result, errors in reporting remain undetected. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: We recommend revising the City’s project tracking spreadsheets to include columns to separately track purchase orders. This will ensure expenses aren’t confused with obligations. We also recommend a member of the Finance Department review and approve the report before it is submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-006 U.S. Department of the Treasury, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, Assistance Listing #21.027 – Internal Controls over State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: As a recipient of State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLRF), the City is required to submit quarterly Project and Expenditure Reports to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. These submissions report cumulative and quarterly obligations and expenditures by project, subaward and vendor information, and revenue replacement information. Condition: We tested 10 of the 39 SLRF projects reported on the quarterly ARPA reports to determine whether cumulative and quarterly expenditures reconcile with the accounting system. We found errors in 4 of the 10 reports: • one project failed to include the reversal of the prior year payroll accrual totaling $1,385, causing that expense to be double-counted; • three projects reported a total of $374,811 of expenditures when the purchase order was approved; however the service had not been performed and the expenditure had not yet been realized. These items were properly reported as obligations but should not have been reported as expenditures. Cause: The project spreadsheets developed to track cumulative and quarterly expenditures do not separately track obligations. In addition, there is no secondary review by a member of the Finance Department to double check the data in the reports. As a result, errors in reporting remain undetected. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: We recommend revising the City’s project tracking spreadsheets to include columns to separately track purchase orders. This will ensure expenses aren’t confused with obligations. We also recommend a member of the Finance Department review and approve the report before it is submitted to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Additional reports will be run to verify totals before filings of quarterly reports, paying particular attention to end of year and the needed reversal of the prior year payroll accrual. Errors found in reports will be corrected in subsequent records as allowable under Department of Treasury grant reporting guidelines.
The April claim reimbursement form overstated breakfast meal counts by 1,000 meals, which comprised 7% of total meals claimed. In addition, operational and administrative payroll costs charged to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program were based on estimated hours worked, rather than actual time and effort records. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a policy to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. In addition, the School Department does not have policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that payroll charges to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Unsupported payroll charges may not meet cost principal requirements resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department establish policies and procedures that ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. We also recommend that policies and procedures be established to ensure employees allocating their time to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program complete documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i). Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-007 U.S. Department of Agriculture, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, Assistance Listing #10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, and 10.582 - Internal Controls over Child Nutrition Cluster Criteria: The School Department receives federal reimbursement for free and reduced price meals provided to children at established reimbursement rates. Monthly claims for reimbursement must be based on lunch counts taken daily at the point of service, which correctly identify the number of free, reduced price, and paid lunches served to eligible students. In addition, the School Department participates in the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program which provides reimbursement of fresh fruit and vegetable purchases and related operational program costs. Charges for salaries and wages to the program must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: The April claim reimbursement form overstated breakfast meal counts by 1,000 meals, which comprised 7% of total meals claimed. In addition, operational and administrative payroll costs charged to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program were based on estimated hours worked, rather than actual time and effort records. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a policy to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. In addition, the School Department does not have policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that payroll charges to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Unsupported payroll charges may not meet cost principal requirements resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department establish policies and procedures that ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. We also recommend that policies and procedures be established to ensure employees allocating their time to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program complete documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i). Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Going forward the School Nutrition staff will keep a spreadsheet documenting meals reimbursed previous fiscal years, and in each month to compare to the number of meals calculated for the current billing month.
The April claim reimbursement form overstated breakfast meal counts by 1,000 meals, which comprised 7% of total meals claimed. In addition, operational and administrative payroll costs charged to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program were based on estimated hours worked, rather than actual time and effort records. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a policy to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. In addition, the School Department does not have policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that payroll charges to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Unsupported payroll charges may not meet cost principal requirements resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department establish policies and procedures that ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. We also recommend that policies and procedures be established to ensure employees allocating their time to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program complete documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i). Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-007 U.S. Department of Agriculture, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, Assistance Listing #10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, and 10.582 - Internal Controls over Child Nutrition Cluster Criteria: The School Department receives federal reimbursement for free and reduced price meals provided to children at established reimbursement rates. Monthly claims for reimbursement must be based on lunch counts taken daily at the point of service, which correctly identify the number of free, reduced price, and paid lunches served to eligible students. In addition, the School Department participates in the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program which provides reimbursement of fresh fruit and vegetable purchases and related operational program costs. Charges for salaries and wages to the program must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: The April claim reimbursement form overstated breakfast meal counts by 1,000 meals, which comprised 7% of total meals claimed. In addition, operational and administrative payroll costs charged to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program were based on estimated hours worked, rather than actual time and effort records. Cause: The Business Manager approves all monthly claims in the CNPWeb system prior to submission to the State. However, the School Department does not have a policy to provide supporting claim documentation to the Business Manager to verify the accuracy of the monthly claim. In addition, the School Department does not have policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that payroll charges to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Effect: Errors in monthly claims may not be detected and corrected in a timely basis resulting in potential questioned costs. Unsupported payroll charges may not meet cost principal requirements resulting in potential questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend the School Department establish policies and procedures that ensure the Business Manager has adequate supporting documentation to verify monthly nutrition claims before they are submitted to the State. We also recommend that policies and procedures be established to ensure employees allocating their time to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program complete documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i). Likely Questioned Costs: None.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: Going forward the School Nutrition staff will keep a spreadsheet documenting meals reimbursed previous fiscal years, and in each month to compare to the number of meals calculated for the current billing month.
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, the City requested $21,212 of CDBG grant funds even though sufficient program income was available to cover those costs. Cause: Internal controls over the CDBG grant program are insufficient to ensure grant funds are only drawn when program income is insufficient to cover program costs. Effect: Since program income exceeded allowable costs in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, there were no eligible costs for grant reimbursement. As a result, Federal funds were drawn to reimburse unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend grant management staff review their grant drawdown procedures to ensure program income is reviewed prior to drawing new grant funds. Known Questioned Costs: $21,212.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-008 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, ALN # 14.218 – Internal Controls over Community Development Block Grant Entitlements Cluster Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.307(e), program income must be deducted from total allowable costs to determine net allowable costs. Program income must be used for current costs unless the Federal awarding agency authorizes otherwise. Condition: In the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, the City requested $21,212 of CDBG grant funds even though sufficient program income was available to cover those costs. Cause: Internal controls over the CDBG grant program are insufficient to ensure grant funds are only drawn when program income is insufficient to cover program costs. Effect: Since program income exceeded allowable costs in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, there were no eligible costs for grant reimbursement. As a result, Federal funds were drawn to reimburse unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend grant management staff review their grant drawdown procedures to ensure program income is reviewed prior to drawing new grant funds. Known Questioned Costs: $21,212.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: The Community Development and Finance Departments acknowledge that EN funds were drawn when it appeared that PI funds were available. The finding was partly influenced by the nature of first quarter draws and the need to record prior year expenses. We have corrected the discrepancy and to address this in the future, we plan to implement a balance sheet account to better track PI balances and expenditures.
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, the City requested $21,212 of CDBG grant funds even though sufficient program income was available to cover those costs. Cause: Internal controls over the CDBG grant program are insufficient to ensure grant funds are only drawn when program income is insufficient to cover program costs. Effect: Since program income exceeded allowable costs in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, there were no eligible costs for grant reimbursement. As a result, Federal funds were drawn to reimburse unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend grant management staff review their grant drawdown procedures to ensure program income is reviewed prior to drawing new grant funds. Known Questioned Costs: $21,212.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-008 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, For the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023, ALN # 14.218 – Internal Controls over Community Development Block Grant Entitlements Cluster Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.307(e), program income must be deducted from total allowable costs to determine net allowable costs. Program income must be used for current costs unless the Federal awarding agency authorizes otherwise. Condition: In the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, the City requested $21,212 of CDBG grant funds even though sufficient program income was available to cover those costs. Cause: Internal controls over the CDBG grant program are insufficient to ensure grant funds are only drawn when program income is insufficient to cover program costs. Effect: Since program income exceeded allowable costs in the first quarter of fiscal year 2023, there were no eligible costs for grant reimbursement. As a result, Federal funds were drawn to reimburse unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend grant management staff review their grant drawdown procedures to ensure program income is reviewed prior to drawing new grant funds. Known Questioned Costs: $21,212.
Management Response/Corrective Action Plan: The Community Development and Finance Departments acknowledge that EN funds were drawn when it appeared that PI funds were available. The finding was partly influenced by the nature of first quarter draws and the need to record prior year expenses. We have corrected the discrepancy and to address this in the future, we plan to implement a balance sheet account to better track PI balances and expenditures.
FAC accepted this audit on September 21, 2023 — management decision was due March 21, 2024.
Certain information related to the PR29 CDBG Cash on Hand report and the PR26 CDBG Financial Summary could not be reconciled to the City?s accounting system or to underlying documentation. Cause: The City utilizes several different systems to administer and track results of the CDBG program. The City?s Munis accounting system is utilized for most financial information, the Mortgage Office software is utilized to track outstanding loans, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IDIS system is used to track project achievements. As such, information must be entered and logged on three different systems. Maintaining continuity of information on all three systems is burdensome and can lead to inaccuracies and data mismanagement. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: All information entered into Munis, the Mortgage Office software, and IDIS should be reconciled monthly to ensure that financial information and data is consistent across all platforms. Quarterly and year-end financial reporting should be prepared and reconciled to the Munis accounting system and supporting documentation should be maintained on file according to the City?s document retention policies. Questioned Costs: None
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2022-002 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, for the period July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, CFDA #14.218 Community Development Block Grant Criteria: Compliance under Reporting for CDBG requires the PR26 CDBG Financial Summary to be submitted annually. Also, there are PR 29 Cash on Hand reports due quarterly. Both reports include financial information that should be reported on a basis consistent with grant terms. Condition: Certain information related to the PR29 CDBG Cash on Hand report and the PR26 CDBG Financial Summary could not be reconciled to the City?s accounting system or to underlying documentation. Cause: The City utilizes several different systems to administer and track results of the CDBG program. The City?s Munis accounting system is utilized for most financial information, the Mortgage Office software is utilized to track outstanding loans, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IDIS system is used to track project achievements. As such, information must be entered and logged on three different systems. Maintaining continuity of information on all three systems is burdensome and can lead to inaccuracies and data mismanagement. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: All information entered into Munis, the Mortgage Office software, and IDIS should be reconciled monthly to ensure that financial information and data is consistent across all platforms. Quarterly and year-end financial reporting should be prepared and reconciled to the Munis accounting system and supporting documentation should be maintained on file according to the City?s document retention policies. Questioned Costs: None
Management?s Response/Corrective Action Plan: The Community Development Department acknowledges that the sporadic nature of drawdowns and their corresponding reports during the audit period has posed challenges in terms of reconciling systems and accurately assessing the financial standing of the City. In response to this matter, the Community Development Department has collaborated closely with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to formulate and implement a uniform set of policies and procedures. These measures have been designed to mitigate the aforementioned issue by mandating a minimum monthly reconciliation between financial reporting systems. Additionally, the establishment of monthly drawdown requirements has been introduced to ensure more consistent and predictable financial operations.
2021-001
FAC accepted this audit on March 30, 2022 — management decision was due September 30, 2022.
Certain information related to the PR03 CDBG Activity Summary Report and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary were not made available or could not be reconciled to the City?s accounting system or to underlying documentation. Cause: The City utilizes several different systems to administer and track results of the CDBG program. The City?s Munis accounting system is utilized for most financial information, the GMS system is utilized to track outstanding loans, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IDIS system is used to track project achievements. As such, information must be entered and logged on three different systems. Maintaining continuity of information on all three systems is burdensome and can lead to inaccuracies and data mismanagement. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: All information entered into Munis, GMS, and IDIS should be reconciled monthly to ensure that financial information and data is consistent across all platforms. Quarterly and year-end financial reporting should be prepared and reconciled to the Munis accounting system and supporting documentation should be maintained on file according to the City?s document retention policies. Additionally, all demographic and project achievement data should be updated in IDIS regularly and reconciled to underlying documentation. Questioned Costs: None
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2021-001 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, for the period July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021, CFDA #14.218 Community Development Block Grant Criteria: Compliance under Reporting for CDBG requires the PR03 CDBG Activity Summary Report and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary to be submitted annually. Both reports include financial information that should be reported on a basis consistent with grant terms. Additionally, the PR03 report also includes certain demographic and performance measures that allows for evaluation of project achievements. Condition: Certain information related to the PR03 CDBG Activity Summary Report and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary were not made available or could not be reconciled to the City?s accounting system or to underlying documentation. Cause: The City utilizes several different systems to administer and track results of the CDBG program. The City?s Munis accounting system is utilized for most financial information, the GMS system is utilized to track outstanding loans, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IDIS system is used to track project achievements. As such, information must be entered and logged on three different systems. Maintaining continuity of information on all three systems is burdensome and can lead to inaccuracies and data mismanagement. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: All information entered into Munis, GMS, and IDIS should be reconciled monthly to ensure that financial information and data is consistent across all platforms. Quarterly and year-end financial reporting should be prepared and reconciled to the Munis accounting system and supporting documentation should be maintained on file according to the City?s document retention policies. Additionally, all demographic and project achievement data should be updated in IDIS regularly and reconciled to underlying documentation. Questioned Costs: None
Management?s Response/Corrective Action Plan: The City plans on implementing the recommendations in the audit. There is completely new staff in the Community Development Department and we are working closely together to make sure that reconciliations will be done and we are implementing new loan software, that will communicate with MUNIS to make things easier to track.
2020-001
Certain payroll costs allocated to the CRF grant were not properly documented. Cause: During the pandemic, the City utilized several different systems to administer and track results of the CRF program across the many different departments at the City. Certain time and effort documentation obtained from the City was not detailed enough to properly substantiate that the activities by City personnel met allowable cost requirements. Effect: Certain activities performed by City personnel may not meet the allowable cost requirements. Recommendation: All City employees allocating time to grant activities should properly complete documentation based on the requirements of 2 CFR ? 200 to ensure amounts are reasonable and allowable. They City should standardized documentation and requirements across all departments to facilitate a simple and reliable reporting process. Questioned Costs: None
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2021-002 U.S. Department of the Treasury, for the period July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021, CFDA #21.019 Coronavirus Relief Fund Criteria: Allowable costs under the Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) must be substantiated with proper documentation detailing the activity and nature of the costs incurred that are allocated to the grant to ensure that such costs are reasonable and appropriate under the grant terms. Condition: Certain payroll costs allocated to the CRF grant were not properly documented. Cause: During the pandemic, the City utilized several different systems to administer and track results of the CRF program across the many different departments at the City. Certain time and effort documentation obtained from the City was not detailed enough to properly substantiate that the activities by City personnel met allowable cost requirements. Effect: Certain activities performed by City personnel may not meet the allowable cost requirements. Recommendation: All City employees allocating time to grant activities should properly complete documentation based on the requirements of 2 CFR ? 200 to ensure amounts are reasonable and allowable. They City should standardized documentation and requirements across all departments to facilitate a simple and reliable reporting process. Questioned Costs: None
Management?s Response/Corrective Action Plan: The City plans on implementing the recommendations in the audit. There is a new grant manager position within the City who is responsible for working closely with all departments to make sure that the City complies with all grant requirements.
Program income generated by the Home Investment Partnership Program was not properly utilized by the City. Cause: Program income is routinely generated as part of the Home Investment Partnership Program at the City. Ordinarily program income must be deducted from total allowable costs to determine the net allowable costs. Program income must be used for current costs unless the Federal awarding agency authorizes otherwise. Due to turnover in key positions at the City, the program income was not properly recognized and deducted from current allowable costs before initiating drawdowns of new federal funds. Effect: The City is holding excess federal funds and these funds are not being utilized in accordance with grant requirements. Recommendation: All program income should be properly identified, reported, and utilized. The City should establish monthly procedures to identify and reconcile program income to records. Additionally, the drawdown process should be standardized and done routinely on a monthly basis to assist in transparency, reconciliations, and to minimize the time that federal funds are held by the City. Questioned Costs: None
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2021-003 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, for the period July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021, CFDA #14.239 Home Investment Partnership Program Criteria: Program income generated by federal grants must be properly identified, recorded, and utilized in accordance with 2 CFR ? 200.307 and other grant specific requirements. Condition: Program income generated by the Home Investment Partnership Program was not properly utilized by the City. Cause: Program income is routinely generated as part of the Home Investment Partnership Program at the City. Ordinarily program income must be deducted from total allowable costs to determine the net allowable costs. Program income must be used for current costs unless the Federal awarding agency authorizes otherwise. Due to turnover in key positions at the City, the program income was not properly recognized and deducted from current allowable costs before initiating drawdowns of new federal funds. Effect: The City is holding excess federal funds and these funds are not being utilized in accordance with grant requirements. Recommendation: All program income should be properly identified, reported, and utilized. The City should establish monthly procedures to identify and reconcile program income to records. Additionally, the drawdown process should be standardized and done routinely on a monthly basis to assist in transparency, reconciliations, and to minimize the time that federal funds are held by the City. Questioned Costs: None
Management?s Response/Corrective Action Plan: The new management of the Community Development Department has rewritten all policies and currently are having weekly meetings with HUD to track progress on implementation of the new policies, which will help correct the issue noted above.
FAC accepted this audit on February 17, 2021 — management decision was due August 17, 2021.
Certain information reported in the PR03 CDBG Activity Summary Report and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary could not be reconciled to the City?s accounting system or to underlying documentation. Cause: The City utilizes several different systems to administer and track results of the CDBG program. The City?s Munis accounting system is utilized for most financial information, the GMS system is utilized to track outstanding loans, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IDIS system is used to track project achievements. As such, information must be entered and logged on three different systems. Maintaining continuity of information on all three systems is burdensome and can lead to inaccuracies. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: All information entered into Munis, GMS, and IDIS should be reconciled monthly to ensure that financial information and data is consistent across all platforms. Quarterly and year-end financial reporting should be prepared and reconciled to the Munis accounting system and supporting documentation should be maintained on file according to the City?s document retention policies. Additionally, all demographic and project achievement data should be updated in IDIS regularly and reconciled to underlying documentation. Questioned Costs: None
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2020-001 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, for the period July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020, CFDA #14.218 Community Development Block Grant Criteria: Compliance under Reporting for CDBG requires the PR03 CDBG Activity Summary Report and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary to be submitted annually. Both reports include financial information that should be reported on a basis consistent with grant terms. Additionally, the PR03 report also includes certain demographic and performance measures that allows for evaluation of project achievements. Condition: Certain information reported in the PR03 CDBG Activity Summary Report and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary could not be reconciled to the City?s accounting system or to underlying documentation. Cause: The City utilizes several different systems to administer and track results of the CDBG program. The City?s Munis accounting system is utilized for most financial information, the GMS system is utilized to track outstanding loans, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IDIS system is used to track project achievements. As such, information must be entered and logged on three different systems. Maintaining continuity of information on all three systems is burdensome and can lead to inaccuracies. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: All information entered into Munis, GMS, and IDIS should be reconciled monthly to ensure that financial information and data is consistent across all platforms. Quarterly and year-end financial reporting should be prepared and reconciled to the Munis accounting system and supporting documentation should be maintained on file according to the City?s document retention policies. Additionally, all demographic and project achievement data should be updated in IDIS regularly and reconciled to underlying documentation. Questioned Costs: None
Management?s Response/Corrective Action Plan: The City plans on implementing the recommendation in the audit. This will be carried out with monthly reconciliation meetings between the Community Development and Financial Departments. The Departments are also working on a better way to align accounts between Munis, GMS, and IDIS.
2019-001
FAC accepted this audit on February 23, 2020 — management decision was due August 23, 2020.
Certain information reported in the SF-425 Federal Financial Reports and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary could not be reconciled to the City?s accounting system. Cause: The City utilizes several different systems to administer and track results of the CDBG program. The City?s Munis accounting system is utilized for most financial information, the GMS system is utilized to track outstanding loans, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IDIS system is used to track project achievements. As such, information must be entered and logged on three different systems. Maintaining continuity of information on all three systems is burdensome and can lead to inaccuracies. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: All information entered into Munis, GMS, and IDIS should be reconciled monthly to ensure that financial information and data is consistent across all platforms. Quarterly and year-end financial reporting should be prepared and reconciled to the Munis accounting system and supporting documentation should be maintained on file according to the City?s document retention policies. Questioned Costs: None
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2019-001 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, for the period July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019, CFDA #14.218 Community Development Block Grant Criteria: The program requires the SF-425 Federal Financial Report to be submitted quarterly and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary to be submitted annually. Both reports include revenue and expenditure information that should be reported on a basis consistent with grant terms. Condition: Certain information reported in the SF-425 Federal Financial Reports and the C04PR26 CDBG Financial Summary could not be reconciled to the City?s accounting system. Cause: The City utilizes several different systems to administer and track results of the CDBG program. The City?s Munis accounting system is utilized for most financial information, the GMS system is utilized to track outstanding loans, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development IDIS system is used to track project achievements. As such, information must be entered and logged on three different systems. Maintaining continuity of information on all three systems is burdensome and can lead to inaccuracies. Effect: Failure to complete reports accurately and maintain proper supporting documentation for amounts reported could skew the financial position of the program and related projects. As such, measurement of results and management decisions for future projects could be based on inaccurate information. Recommendation: All information entered into Munis, GMS, and IDIS should be reconciled monthly to ensure that financial information and data is consistent across all platforms. Quarterly and year-end financial reporting should be prepared and reconciled to the Munis accounting system and supporting documentation should be maintained on file according to the City?s document retention policies. Questioned Costs: None
The City plans on implementing the recommendation in the audit. This will be carried out with monthly reconciliation meetings between the Community Development and Financial Departments. The Departments are also working on a better way to align accounts between Munis, GMS, and IDIS.
FAC accepted this audit on January 8, 2019 — management decision was due July 8, 2019.
FAC accepted this audit on December 13, 2017 — management decision was due June 13, 2018.
FAC accepted this audit on January 18, 2017 — management decision was due July 18, 2017.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Data source: This information comes from the Federal Audit Clearinghouse, the official repository of Single Audit data. All data is public domain. Verify this organization's audit history at fac.gov.
Browse other Single Audit organizations in Maine →
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →Monitor subrecipient audit findings and filing records.
Start monitoring →© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.
