EIN: 383412779
UEI: RFKVLNVC28J5
Data as of August 22, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on April 6, 2023. 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 October 6, 2023 (1051 days ago).
What is a management decision? →Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name: Assistance Listing Number 21.019, Department of Treasury, Covid-19: Coronavirus Relief Fund Federal Award Identification Number and Year: n/a Pass-through Entity ? Oakland County Finding Type ? Material weakness in internal control over compliance Repeat Finding ? No Criteria ? Per 2 CFR ? 200.403(h), costs must be incurred during the approved budget period. Budget period means the time interval from the start date of a funded portion of an award to the end date of that funded portion during which recipients are authorized to expend the funds awarded, including any funds carried forward or other revisions pursuant to 200.308. A non-Federal entity may charge to the Federal award only allowable costs incurred during the period of performance. Condition ? During our testing for Period of Performance, it was noted that 8 out of 49 disbursements tested did not comply with the Period of Performance requirements as specified in the Oakland County grant agreement. Funds were disbursed for expenses incurred after the expiration date of the grant. Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed ? Actual error of $28,801 was extrapolated to the entire population. Likely questioned cost, (extrapolated amount) are $44,725. Likely Questioned Costs ? $44,725 Known Questioned Costs ? $28,801Cause ? Management did not follow their internal controls to ensure that compliance with Period of Performance requirements were met. Effect ? Certain expenditures were disbursed for expenses incurred after the expiration date of the grant. Recommendation ? We recommend that all expenditures charged under the grant fall within the required Period of Performance requirements as specified in the grant agreement. View of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan ? Grant expenditures that specify a period of coverage and/or performance will be amortized based on the service contract terms. Amortization costs that go beyond a grant?s expiration date will not be recorded against the expired grant.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name: Assistance Listing Number 21.019, Department of Treasury, Covid-19: Coronavirus Relief Fund Federal Award Identification Number and Year: n/a Pass-through Entity ? Oakland County Finding Type ? Material weakness in internal control over compliance Repeat Finding ? No Criteria ? Per 2 CFR ? 200.403(h), costs must be incurred during the approved budget period. Budget period means the time interval from the start date of a funded portion of an award to the end date of that funded portion during which recipients are authorized to expend the funds awarded, including any funds carried forward or other revisions pursuant to 200.308. A non-Federal entity may charge to the Federal award only allowable costs incurred during the period of performance. Condition ? During our testing for Period of Performance, it was noted that 8 out of 49 disbursements tested did not comply with the Period of Performance requirements as specified in the Oakland County grant agreement. Funds were disbursed for expenses incurred after the expiration date of the grant. Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed ? Actual error of $28,801 was extrapolated to the entire population. Likely questioned cost, (extrapolated amount) are $44,725. Likely Questioned Costs ? $44,725 Known Questioned Costs ? $28,801Cause ? Management did not follow their internal controls to ensure that compliance with Period of Performance requirements were met. Effect ? Certain expenditures were disbursed for expenses incurred after the expiration date of the grant. Recommendation ? We recommend that all expenditures charged under the grant fall within the required Period of Performance requirements as specified in the grant agreement. View of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan ? Grant expenditures that specify a period of coverage and/or performance will be amortized based on the service contract terms. Amortization costs that go beyond a grant?s expiration date will not be recorded against the expired grant.
Grant expenditures that specify a period of coverage and/or performance will be amortized based on the service contract terms. Amortization costs that go beyond a grant?s expiration date will not be recorded against the expired grant.
FAC accepted this audit on March 14, 2022 — management decision was due September 14, 2022.
2021-001 Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name: Assistance Listing Number 21.019, Department of Treasury, Coronavirus Relief Fund Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 2021 Pass-through Entity ? Oakland County and Macomb County Finding Type ? Significant Deficiency over non-compliance Repeat Finding ? No Criteria ? Per 2 CFR ? 200.303, the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in ?Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government? issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the ?Internal Control Integrated Framework?, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition ? During our test work over Activities Allowed and Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements, we selected 55 non payroll related expenditures charged to the grant and noted 1 instance where the check was missing evidence of the appropriate authorized signature. Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed ? n/a Questioned Costs ? n/aContext ? The control is in place; but was not followed, therefore not operating effectively. While Management has an understanding of the Uniform Guidance regulations, the client did not follow their own internal control process. Cause/Effect ? Internal control procedures were bypassed and not followed. Although no instances of noncompliance were noted, the Organization did not follow their own internal control polices and therefore instances of non-compliance could have taken place without management's knowledge. Recommendation ? We recommend that Management implements and maintains effective internal control over Cash Management and comply with 2 CFR 200.303 requirements. View of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan ? Management believes that internal controls are effective. The lack of a signature on the one check in the sample represents an isolated incidence and a human error. Although the check signature was missing, the expenditure was appropriate, and the supporting documentation had evidence of approval. No unauthorized expenditures or loss of assets occurred. This condition was not identified in any other expenditures during this or previous audits. Greater attention
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2021-001 Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name: Assistance Listing Number 21.019, Department of Treasury, Coronavirus Relief Fund Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 2021 Pass-through Entity ? Oakland County and Macomb County Finding Type ? Significant Deficiency over non-compliance Repeat Finding ? No Criteria ? Per 2 CFR ? 200.303, the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in ?Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government? issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the ?Internal Control Integrated Framework?, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition ? During our test work over Activities Allowed and Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements, we selected 55 non payroll related expenditures charged to the grant and noted 1 instance where the check was missing evidence of the appropriate authorized signature. Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed ? n/a Questioned Costs ? n/aContext ? The control is in place; but was not followed, therefore not operating effectively. While Management has an understanding of the Uniform Guidance regulations, the client did not follow their own internal control process. Cause/Effect ? Internal control procedures were bypassed and not followed. Although no instances of noncompliance were noted, the Organization did not follow their own internal control polices and therefore instances of non-compliance could have taken place without management's knowledge. Recommendation ? We recommend that Management implements and maintains effective internal control over Cash Management and comply with 2 CFR 200.303 requirements. View of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan ? Management believes that internal controls are effective. The lack of a signature on the one check in the sample represents an isolated incidence and a human error. Although the check signature was missing, the expenditure was appropriate, and the supporting documentation had evidence of approval. No unauthorized expenditures or loss of assets occurred. This condition was not identified in any other expenditures during this or previous audits. Greater attention
2021-001 View of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan ? Management believes that internal controls are effective. The lack of a signature on the one check in the sample represents an isolated incidence and a human error. Although the check signature was missing, the expenditure was appropriate, and the supporting documentation had evidence of approval. No unauthorized expenditures or loss of assets occurred. This condition was not identified in any other expenditures during this or previous audits. Greater attention will be placed by signers to assure this is not repeated.
2021-002 Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name: Assistance Listing Number 21.019, Department of Treasury, Coronavirus Relief Fund Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 2021 Pass-through Entity ? Oakland County and Macomb County Finding Type ? Significant Deficiency over non-compliance Repeat Finding ? NoCriteria ? Per 2 CFR ? 200.303, the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in ?Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government? issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the ?Internal Control Integrated Framework?, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition ? During our test work over Activities Allowed and Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements, we selected 5 payroll related expenditures charged to the grant and noted 2 instances where the time sheets did not show evidence of approval by the supervisors. Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed ? n/a Questioned Costs ? n/a Context ? The control is in place; but was not followed, therefore not operating effectively. While Management has an understanding of the Uniform Guidance regulations, the client did not follow their own internal control process. Cause/Effect ? Internal control procedures were bypassed and not followed. Although no instances of noncompliance were noted, the Organization did not follow their own internal control polices and therefore instances of non-compliance could have taken place without management's knowledge. Recommendation ? We recommend that Management implements and maintains effective internal control over Cash Management and comply with 2 CFR 200.303 requirements. View of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan ? Timecards are required to be signed by employees and approved by their supervisor. An additional step has been added to the payroll process to contact the responsible supervisor for any missing approvals before the payroll is processed.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2021-002 Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name: Assistance Listing Number 21.019, Department of Treasury, Coronavirus Relief Fund Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 2021 Pass-through Entity ? Oakland County and Macomb County Finding Type ? Significant Deficiency over non-compliance Repeat Finding ? NoCriteria ? Per 2 CFR ? 200.303, the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in ?Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government? issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the ?Internal Control Integrated Framework?, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition ? During our test work over Activities Allowed and Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements, we selected 5 payroll related expenditures charged to the grant and noted 2 instances where the time sheets did not show evidence of approval by the supervisors. Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed ? n/a Questioned Costs ? n/a Context ? The control is in place; but was not followed, therefore not operating effectively. While Management has an understanding of the Uniform Guidance regulations, the client did not follow their own internal control process. Cause/Effect ? Internal control procedures were bypassed and not followed. Although no instances of noncompliance were noted, the Organization did not follow their own internal control polices and therefore instances of non-compliance could have taken place without management's knowledge. Recommendation ? We recommend that Management implements and maintains effective internal control over Cash Management and comply with 2 CFR 200.303 requirements. View of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan ? Timecards are required to be signed by employees and approved by their supervisor. An additional step has been added to the payroll process to contact the responsible supervisor for any missing approvals before the payroll is processed.
2021-002 View of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan ? Timecards are required to be signed by employees and approved by their supervisor. An additional step has been added to the payroll process to contact the responsible supervisor for any missing approvals before the payroll is processed.
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.
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →Monitor subrecipient audit findings and compliance status.
Start monitoring →© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.