← Back to home

Burlington Community Action Partnership, Inc.Non-Profit

EIN: 221804209

UEI: K6KRBYG9V4C7

Audited by: Mercadien

Oversight agency: 93 [Department of Health and Human Services]

View federal awards & risk assessment →

Data as of September 2, 2026

Burlington Community Action Partnership, Inc.9 audit years5 findings
9
Audit Years
5
Total Findings
0
Repeat Findings
$2.7M
Federal Awards Expended (FY 2024)

FY 2024-02-29

$2,699,300 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization

The FAC accepted this audit on November 19, 2024. 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 May 19, 2025 (473 days ago).

What is a management decision? →

FY 2023-02-28

$2,816,311 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on February 7, 2024 — management decision was due August 7, 2024.

FY 2022-02-28

$2,669,979 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on August 1, 2023 — management decision was due February 1, 2024.

FY 2021-02-28

$5,761,706 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 27, 2022 — management decision was due May 27, 2023.

FY 2020-02-29

$8,882,643 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on August 29, 2021 — management decision was due March 1, 2022.

FY 2019-02-28

$8,815,295 federal awards expended

FAC accepted this audit on March 30, 2020 — management decision was due September 30, 2020.

2019-002
Cost Allowability
MODIFIED OPINIONSIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY

The Organization was unable to locate 3 invoices selected for testing; Questioned Costs: Undeterminable; Context: The invoices in question could not be verified as allowable costs for the grant; Cause: The invoices in question may have been filed in an incorrect location or inadvertently discarded; Effect: The Organization cannot verify these expenditures as allowable costs for the grant; Recommendation: We recommend management review administrative and filing procedures to ensure all invoices charged to grants can be located; Views of Responsible Officials: records retention policy was added to the revised Fiscal Policies and Procedure Manual. All documentation, including support for disbursements, must be maintained for 7 years and is to be maintain in locked filing cabinets in the accounting department.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Criteria: 2 CFR, Part 200, ?200.303 requires an auditee to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award; Condition: The Organization was unable to locate 3 invoices selected for testing; Questioned Costs: Undeterminable; Context: The invoices in question could not be verified as allowable costs for the grant; Cause: The invoices in question may have been filed in an incorrect location or inadvertently discarded; Effect: The Organization cannot verify these expenditures as allowable costs for the grant; Recommendation: We recommend management review administrative and filing procedures to ensure all invoices charged to grants can be located; Views of Responsible Officials: records retention policy was added to the revised Fiscal Policies and Procedure Manual. All documentation, including support for disbursements, must be maintained for 7 years and is to be maintain in locked filing cabinets in the accounting department.

Corrective Action Plan

A records retention policy was added to the revised Fiscal Policies and Procedure Manual. All documentation, including support for disbursements must be maintained for 7 years and is to be maintained in a locked filing cabinet in the accounting department.

About Allowable Costs / Cost Principles →
2019-003
Cost Allowability
MATERIAL WEAKNESSMODIFIED OPINION

The Organization did not allocate to the various grant programs the costs associated with 9 invoices selected for testing related to audit, IT, computer and insurance services; Questioned Costs: Undeterminable; Context: The costs related to these invoices related to more than the Head Start program and a portion should have been allocated to other grant programs; Cause:The Organization experienced significant turnover in the fiscal office during the audit period. As a result, the new staff in the Organization's fiscal office were unaware of previous allocation methodologies and allocated these costs to only one program; Effect: The Organization over-charged the Head Start grant for a portion of these expenditures; Recommendation: We recommend management establish and execute a methodology for allocating costs among grant programs; Views of Responsible Officials: We have restructured our fiscal department and developed an appropriate allocation methodology to comply with funding sources and allowable allocation and are currently in compliance with contract and grant requirements. Senior fiscal management currently reviews allocations applied to ensure allocated costs are appropriate and adjustments, if any, are made timely

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Criteria: 2 CFR, Part 200, ?200.303 requires an auditee to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award; Condition: The Organization did not allocate to the various grant programs the costs associated with 9 invoices selected for testing related to audit, IT, computer and insurance services; Questioned Costs: Undeterminable; Context: The costs related to these invoices related to more than the Head Start program and a portion should have been allocated to other grant programs; Cause:The Organization experienced significant turnover in the fiscal office during the audit period. As a result, the new staff in the Organization's fiscal office were unaware of previous allocation methodologies and allocated these costs to only one program; Effect: The Organization over-charged the Head Start grant for a portion of these expenditures; Recommendation: We recommend management establish and execute a methodology for allocating costs among grant programs; Views of Responsible Officials: We have restructured our fiscal department and developed an appropriate allocation methodology to comply with funding sources and allowable allocation and are currently in compliance with contract and grant requirements. Senior fiscal management currently reviews allocations applied to ensure allocated costs are appropriate and adjustments, if any, are made timely

Corrective Action Plan

We have restructured our fiscal department and developed an appropriate allocation methodology to comply with funding sources and allowable allocation and are currently in compliance with contract and grant requirements. Senior fiscal management currently reviews allocations applied to ensure allocated costs are appropriate and adjustments, if any, are made timely.

About Allowable Costs / Cost Principles →
2019-004
Special Tests & Provisions
MODIFIED OPINIONSIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY

The Organization did not follow policies related to Davis-Bacon for facilities renovations to ensure laborers and mechanics were paid prevailing wage rates in their locality; Questioned Costs: None; Context: If Davis-Bacon is not followed, laborers and mechanics could be paid less than prevailing wage rates for work performed; Cause: The Organization experienced significant turnover in the fiscal office during the audit period. Additionally, it had been several years since the Organization undertook construction and renovation activities subject to Davis-Bacon requirements. As a result, the new staff in the Organization's fiscal office did not follow Davis-Bacon requirements; Effect: The Organization did not follow the Davis-Bacon Act; therefore laborers and mechanics could have been paid less than prevailing wage rates for the area; Recommendation: We recommend management reestablish polices to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act is followed for all construction and renovation projects over $2,000 in accordance with the Uniform Guidance; Views of Responsible Officials: We have revised policies and procedures to include requirements of implementing the Davis-Bacon Act. Staff has been trained on the Davis Bacon Act. Management has established policies to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act is followed for all constructions and renovation projects over $2,000 and is in accordance with the Uniform Guidance

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Criteria: 2 CFR, Part 200, ?200.303 requires an auditee to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award.; Condition: The Organization did not follow policies related to Davis-Bacon for facilities renovations to ensure laborers and mechanics were paid prevailing wage rates in their locality; Questioned Costs: None; Context: If Davis-Bacon is not followed, laborers and mechanics could be paid less than prevailing wage rates for work performed; Cause: The Organization experienced significant turnover in the fiscal office during the audit period. Additionally, it had been several years since the Organization undertook construction and renovation activities subject to Davis-Bacon requirements. As a result, the new staff in the Organization's fiscal office did not follow Davis-Bacon requirements; Effect: The Organization did not follow the Davis-Bacon Act; therefore laborers and mechanics could have been paid less than prevailing wage rates for the area; Recommendation: We recommend management reestablish polices to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act is followed for all construction and renovation projects over $2,000 in accordance with the Uniform Guidance; Views of Responsible Officials: We have revised policies and procedures to include requirements of implementing the Davis-Bacon Act. Staff has been trained on the Davis Bacon Act. Management has established policies to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act is followed for all constructions and renovation projects over $2,000 and is in accordance with the Uniform Guidance

Corrective Action Plan

We have revised policies and procedures to include requirements of implementing the Davis-Bacon Act. Staff has been trained on the Davis-Bacon Act. Management has established policies to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act is followed for all construction and renovation projects over $2,000 and is in accordance with the Uniform Guidance.

About Special Tests and Provisions →
2019-005
Reporting
MATERIAL WEAKNESSOTHER MATTERS

GSA_MIGRATION

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

GSA_MIGRATION

Corrective Action Plan

GSA_MIGRATION

About Reporting →

FY 2018-02-28

$9,061,544 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 28, 2018 — management decision was due May 28, 2019.

FY 2017-02-28

MATERIAL NONCOMPLIANCE DISCLOSED$9,005,923 federal awards expended

FAC accepted this audit on November 29, 2017 — management decision was due May 29, 2018.

2017-002
Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking
MATERIAL WEAKNESSMODIFIED OPINION

GSA_MIGRATION

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

GSA_MIGRATION

Corrective Action Plan

GSA_MIGRATION

About Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking →

FY 2016-02-29

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$9,171,080 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 29, 2016 — management decision was due May 29, 2017.

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 New Jersey

Are you this organization?

Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.

Start tracking findings →

Do you fund this organization?

Add it to a monitored group and get alerted when a new audit, finding, repeat finding, or management-decision deadline shows up — instead of checking back.

Checking several at once? Portfolio view →

Product

Resources

Legal

Single Audit Intelligence is an independent tool powered by Federal Audit Clearinghouse data. Not affiliated with GSA, OMB, or any federal agency.

© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.