WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNCIL ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

EIN: 251598389

UEI: W4QXSJWSPN85

Data as of August 23, 2026

WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNCIL ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT8 audit years1 findings
8
Audit Years
1
Total Findings
0
Repeat Findings

FY 2020-09-30

Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization

The FAC accepted this audit on February 9, 2021. 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 August 9, 2021 (1841 days ago).

What is a management decision? →
2020-001
Special Tests & Provisions

During our audit, we noted that the Council charged one microloan borrower an interest rate in excess of the maximum interest rate. The microloan was $15,000 and the Intermediary?s Cost of Funds was 0. Therefore, the maximum interest rate allowed to be charged was 7.75% and the Council charged an interest rate of 8%. Criteria: Per the Small Business Administration, the maximum interest rate an Intermediary is allowed to charge on a Microloan is defined by the Intermediary?s Cost of Funds and is dependent upon the size of the Microloan. If the Microloan is $10,000 or less, the maximum interest rate an Intermediary may charge a Microloan borrower is 8.50 percent over the Intermediary?s Cost of Funds. If the Microloan is greater than $10,000, the maximum interest rate an Intermediary may charge a Microloan borrower is 7.75% over the Intermediary?s Cost of Funds. Cause: Although procedures were in place to determine interest rates, the procedures applied the same criteria regardless of the loan amount instead of differentiating the rates based on loans less than $10,000 and loans in excess of $10,000. Effect of the Condition: The Council charged an interest rate in excess of the allowable rate. Recommendation: We recommend that the Council ensures procedures are followed to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Small Business Administration and any changes related to this specific item are made by the Council. View of responsible officials and planned corrective action: Management agrees with this finding; see the separate Corrective Action Plan.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Small Business Administration (CFDA #59.046) Statement of Condition: During our audit, we noted that the Council charged one microloan borrower an interest rate in excess of the maximum interest rate. The microloan was $15,000 and the Intermediary?s Cost of Funds was 0. Therefore, the maximum interest rate allowed to be charged was 7.75% and the Council charged an interest rate of 8%. Criteria: Per the Small Business Administration, the maximum interest rate an Intermediary is allowed to charge on a Microloan is defined by the Intermediary?s Cost of Funds and is dependent upon the size of the Microloan. If the Microloan is $10,000 or less, the maximum interest rate an Intermediary may charge a Microloan borrower is 8.50 percent over the Intermediary?s Cost of Funds. If the Microloan is greater than $10,000, the maximum interest rate an Intermediary may charge a Microloan borrower is 7.75% over the Intermediary?s Cost of Funds. Cause: Although procedures were in place to determine interest rates, the procedures applied the same criteria regardless of the loan amount instead of differentiating the rates based on loans less than $10,000 and loans in excess of $10,000. Effect of the Condition: The Council charged an interest rate in excess of the allowable rate. Recommendation: We recommend that the Council ensures procedures are followed to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Small Business Administration and any changes related to this specific item are made by the Council. View of responsible officials and planned corrective action: Management agrees with this finding; see the separate Corrective Action Plan.

Corrective Action Plan

FINDING: 2020-001 SBA Loan Compliance - The Cause of this error was due to the unforeseen situation at WCCED prior to the November 1, 2019 closing of loan. - The Executive Director was on medical leave, the Accountant was dealing with the sudden loss of her son on top of her husband's terminal illness. Which left the Loan Processor/Office Manager essentially on their own. - In addition to regular work, the Loan Processor/Office Manager had SBA quarter reports; SBA T/A reimbursement; IRP semi annual reports all due by October 30th along with organizing the 400 invitee Annual Luncheon on October 31st. - The original application was for a $10,000 loan which would have qualified it for the higher rate. - The SBA did not even catch the glitch when the loan was entered into the system. - When the issue was brought to the attention of the office, a complete review of the loans was done and this was the only loan that an error existed within. This was an isolated error that I believe would not have occurred under normal circumstances, we all work hard to stay in compliance with SBA. As such we have developed a listing of loan amounts and interest rates for each of the SBA loan funds that have been checked and added to the loan file with both loan and loan fund (size and rate) prior to closing and initialed by the Loan Processor, the Accountant, ad the Executive Director to ensure this one-time occurrence never happens again.

About Special Tests and Provisions →

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.

Are you this organization?

Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.

Start tracking findings →

Do you fund this organization?

Monitor subrecipient audit findings and compliance status.

Start monitoring →

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.