EIN: 520906599
UEI: N9CLA5D2GY75
Audited by: UHY LLP
Oversight agency: 16 [Department of Justice]
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 January 5, 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 July 5, 2026 (56 days ago).
What is a management decision? →FAC accepted this audit on December 27, 2024 — management decision was due June 27, 2025.
FAC accepted this audit on February 26, 2024 — management decision was due August 26, 2024.
FAC accepted this audit on January 22, 2023 — management decision was due July 22, 2023.
FAC accepted this audit on March 25, 2022 — management decision was due September 25, 2022.
FAC accepted this audit on March 30, 2021 — management decision was due September 30, 2021.
FAC accepted this audit on September 28, 2020 — management decision was due March 28, 2021.
During our testing, we noted Foundation did not maintain support for their review of the search for suspension and debarment. The Foundation did not have effective controls to ensure vendors were not suspended or debarred. Questioned costs: None. Context: For five out of five vendors tested we noted that documentation related to suspension and debarment verification to ensure the vendor was not on the suspended or debarred vendor list was not maintained and the Foundation could not confirm that verifications were performed. However, our testing did not identify any vendors that had been suspended or debarred. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding suspension and debarment verification were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: CLA noted no instances of noncompliance with the provisions of procurement, suspension, and debarment; however, the lack of effective internal controls over these compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Condition: During our testing, we noted Foundation did not maintain support for their review of the search for suspension and debarment. The Foundation did not have effective controls to ensure vendors were not suspended or debarred. Questioned costs: None. Context: For five out of five vendors tested we noted that documentation related to suspension and debarment verification to ensure the vendor was not on the suspended or debarred vendor list was not maintained and the Foundation could not confirm that verifications were performed. However, our testing did not identify any vendors that had been suspended or debarred. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding suspension and debarment verification were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: CLA noted no instances of noncompliance with the provisions of procurement, suspension, and debarment; however, the lack of effective internal controls over these compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance.
Action planned in response to finding: When the Foundation became aware of missing documentation for the verifications performed, the Foundation enhanced its internal processes to require evidence of suspension and debarment verifications as part of the subrecipient award request process and documentation prior to award. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Sarita Coletrane, Contracts Manager Planned completion date for corrective action plan: December 2019
During our testing we noted the Foundation was not able to produce audit evidence of the review and approval of its quarterly financial reports. Context: Six out of six quarterly financial reports did not have adequate evidence to show the reports were reviewed. Questioned costs: None. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding reporting were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: The lack of effective internal controls over reporting compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Condition: During our testing we noted the Foundation was not able to produce audit evidence of the review and approval of its quarterly financial reports. Context: Six out of six quarterly financial reports did not have adequate evidence to show the reports were reviewed. Questioned costs: None. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding reporting were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: The lack of effective internal controls over reporting compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance.
Action planned in response to finding: Quarterly financial reports are developed from the actual expenses recorded in our accounting system and then submitted in the grantor?s grant systems. When we became aware of the challenges with documenting supervisory review of the financial report data prior to submission, we implemented an electronic approval process that now documents supervisory/executive review of the financial report data pulled from the accounting system prior to its submission to grantors. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Jane Dorsey, Director of Finance and Administration Planned completion date for corrective action plan: December 2019
During our testing over subrecipient monitoring requirements, we noted that the Foundation was not able to provide evidence to support review of the monitoring of the subrecipients. However, our testing did not identify any subrecipients that did not have monitoring performed. Context: Five of five subrecipients selected for testing did not have evidence to support review of the subrecipient monitoring procedures that occurred. Questioned costs: None. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding reporting were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: The lack of documentation of the performance of internal controls over these compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Condition: During our testing over subrecipient monitoring requirements, we noted that the Foundation was not able to provide evidence to support review of the monitoring of the subrecipients. However, our testing did not identify any subrecipients that did not have monitoring performed. Context: Five of five subrecipients selected for testing did not have evidence to support review of the subrecipient monitoring procedures that occurred. Questioned costs: None. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding reporting were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: The lack of documentation of the performance of internal controls over these compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance.
Action planned in response to finding: The Foundation has updated its subrecipient monitoring policy to reflect the electronic nature information and documentation gathered in the course of subrecipient monitoring. This updated procedure will document the monitoring performed. The Foundation has also clarified staff monitoring roles and has and will continue to provide training to project staff on monitoring responsibilities and methods of documenting their monitoring within the electronic systems. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Sarita Coletrane, Contracts Manager Planned completion date for corrective action plan: August 18, 2020
FAC accepted this audit on March 29, 2019 — management decision was due September 29, 2019.
FAC accepted this audit on March 28, 2018 — management decision was due September 28, 2018.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-001
FAC accepted this audit on March 19, 2017 — management decision was due September 19, 2017.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴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 Virginia →
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.
