← Back to home

West Liberty Community School DistrictLocal Government

EIN: 426004037

UEI: KSWJM4D6E7W6

Audited by: Terpstra Hoke and Associates P.C.

Oversight agency: 10 [Department of Agriculture]

View federal awards & risk assessment →

Data as of September 2, 2026

West Liberty Community School District10 audit years4 findings2 repeat
10
Audit Years
4
Total Findings
2
Repeat Findings
$1.5M
Federal Awards Expended (FY 2025)

FY 2025-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINION$1,470,002 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization

The FAC accepted this audit on March 25, 2026. 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 September 25, 2026 (19 days from today).

What is a management decision? →

FY 2024-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINIONMATERIAL NONCOMPLIANCE DISCLOSED$2,331,706 federal awards expended

FAC accepted this audit on March 20, 2025 — management decision was due September 20, 2025.

2024-001
Special Tests & Provisions
MODIFIED OPINIONREPEAT OF 2023-002

Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Criteria – The Davis-Bacon Act as supplemented by U.S. Department of Labor regulations requires recipients that use federal funds for minor remodeling, renovation, or construction contracts that are over $2,000 to require the contractor to pay laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week. Condition – The District has not received any required certified payrolls from the construction contractor so the District is unable to verify if the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage and pay requirements were met. In addition, the Davis-Bacon requirements were not included in the construction contract as required. Cause - The District and its construction architect did not ensure that the applicable Davis-Bacon requirements were included in the project bid documents and construction contract. As a result, the contractor was unaware of the requirements upon bidding and completing the project. Effect – The District is not in compliance with federal regulations pertaining to wage rate requirements as required by the Uniform Guidance and the Davis-Bacon Act. Recommendation – The District should ensure that all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements are included in all bid documents and construction contracts. The District should also require and monitor that construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act. Response and Corrective Action Planned – We will make sure any future construction projects paid from federal funds properly include all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the bid documents and construction contracts. We will require and monitor that any future construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act. Conclusion – Response accepted.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Criteria – The Davis-Bacon Act as supplemented by U.S. Department of Labor regulations requires recipients that use federal funds for minor remodeling, renovation, or construction contracts that are over $2,000 to require the contractor to pay laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week. Condition – The District has not received any required certified payrolls from the construction contractor so the District is unable to verify if the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage and pay requirements were met. In addition, the Davis-Bacon requirements were not included in the construction contract as required. Cause - The District and its construction architect did not ensure that the applicable Davis-Bacon requirements were included in the project bid documents and construction contract. As a result, the contractor was unaware of the requirements upon bidding and completing the project. Effect – The District is not in compliance with federal regulations pertaining to wage rate requirements as required by the Uniform Guidance and the Davis-Bacon Act. Recommendation – The District should ensure that all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements are included in all bid documents and construction contracts. The District should also require and monitor that construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act. Response and Corrective Action Planned – We will make sure any future construction projects paid from federal funds properly include all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the bid documents and construction contracts. We will require and monitor that any future construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act. Conclusion – Response accepted.

Corrective Action Plan

We will make sure any future construction projects paid from federal funds properly include all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the bid documents and construction contracts. We will require and monitor that any future construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act.

Prior Finding References

2023-002

About Special Tests and Provisions →
2024-002
Special Tests & Provisions
MATERIAL WEAKNESSREPEAT OF 2023-003

Wage Rate Requirements – The District did not properly include the applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the construction contract and did not properly monitor the construction contractor’s remittance of payroll information to ensure compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act. See 2024-001.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Wage Rate Requirements – The District did not properly include the applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the construction contract and did not properly monitor the construction contractor’s remittance of payroll information to ensure compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act. See 2024-001.

Corrective Action Plan

We will make sure any future construction projects paid from federal funds properly include all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the bid documents and construction contracts. We will require and monitor that any future construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act.

Prior Finding References

2023-003

About Special Tests and Provisions →

FY 2023-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINIONMATERIAL NONCOMPLIANCE DISCLOSED$2,394,562 federal awards expended

FAC accepted this audit on May 20, 2024 — management decision was due November 20, 2024.

2023-002
Special Tests & Provisions
MODIFIED OPINION

Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Criteria – The Davis-Bacon Act as supplemented by U.S. Department of Labor regulations requires recipients that use federal funds for minor remodeling, renovation, or construction contracts that are over $2,000 to require the contractor to pay laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week. Condition – The District has not received any required certified payrolls from the construction contractor so the District is unable to verify if the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage and pay requirements were met. In addition, the Davis-Bacon requirements were not included in the construction contract as required. Cause - The District and its construction architect did not ensure that the applicable Davis-Bacon requirements were included in the project bid documents and construction contract. As a result, the contractor was unaware of the requirements upon bidding and completing the project. Effect – The District is not in compliance with federal regulations pertaining to wage rate requirements as required by the Uniform Guidance and the Davis-Bacon Act. Recommendation – The District should ensure that all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements are included in all bid documents and construction contracts. The District should also require and monitor that construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act. Response and Corrective Action Planned – We will make sure any future construction projects paid from federal funds properly include all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the bid documents and construction contracts. We will require and monitor that any future construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act. Conclusion – Response accepted.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Criteria – The Davis-Bacon Act as supplemented by U.S. Department of Labor regulations requires recipients that use federal funds for minor remodeling, renovation, or construction contracts that are over $2,000 to require the contractor to pay laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week. Condition – The District has not received any required certified payrolls from the construction contractor so the District is unable to verify if the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage and pay requirements were met. In addition, the Davis-Bacon requirements were not included in the construction contract as required. Cause - The District and its construction architect did not ensure that the applicable Davis-Bacon requirements were included in the project bid documents and construction contract. As a result, the contractor was unaware of the requirements upon bidding and completing the project. Effect – The District is not in compliance with federal regulations pertaining to wage rate requirements as required by the Uniform Guidance and the Davis-Bacon Act. Recommendation – The District should ensure that all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements are included in all bid documents and construction contracts. The District should also require and monitor that construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act. Response and Corrective Action Planned – We will make sure any future construction projects paid from federal funds properly include all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the bid documents and construction contracts. We will require and monitor that any future construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act. Conclusion – Response accepted.

Corrective Action Plan

We will make sure any future construction projects paid from federal funds properly include all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the bid documents and construction contracts. We will require and monitor that any future construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act.

About Special Tests and Provisions →
2023-003
Special Tests & Provisions
MATERIAL WEAKNESS

Wage Rate Requirements – The District did not properly include the applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the construction contract and did not properly monitor the construction contractor’s remittance of payroll information to ensure compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act. See 2023-002.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Wage Rate Requirements – The District did not properly include the applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the construction contract and did not properly monitor the construction contractor’s remittance of payroll information to ensure compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act. See 2023-002.

Corrective Action Plan

We will make sure any future construction projects paid from federal funds properly include all applicable Davis-Bacon requirements in the bid documents and construction contracts. We will require and monitor that any future construction contractors paid from federal funds timely remit the required payroll information to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance as related to the Davis-Bacon Act.

About Special Tests and Provisions →

FY 2022-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINION$2,284,945 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on March 23, 2023 — management decision was due September 23, 2023.

FY 2021-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINION$1,557,120 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on March 3, 2022 — management decision was due September 3, 2022.

FY 2020-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINION$1,241,703 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on March 11, 2021 — management decision was due September 11, 2021.

FY 2019-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINION$1,118,086 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on March 17, 2020 — management decision was due September 17, 2020.

FY 2018-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINION$1,123,832 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on February 4, 2019 — management decision was due August 4, 2019.

FY 2017-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINION$1,095,452 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on January 17, 2018 — management decision was due July 17, 2018.

FY 2016-06-30

UNMODIFIED OPINION, DISCLAIMER OF OPINION$1,054,282 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on January 19, 2017 — management decision was due July 19, 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 Iowa

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.