← Back to home

Kuumba Community Health & Wellness Center, Inc. dba New HorizonsNon-Profit

EIN: 541937835

UEI: N4W1EJFNVCB8

Audited by: Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates

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

View federal awards & risk assessment →

Data as of September 2, 2026

Kuumba Community Health & Wellness Center, Inc. dba New Horizons10 audit years2 findings
10
Audit Years
2
Total Findings
0
Repeat Findings
$3.3M
Federal Awards Expended (FY 2025)

FY 2025-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$3,349,474 federal awards expended

Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization

The FAC accepted this audit on March 27, 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 27, 2026 (24 days from today).

What is a management decision? →
2025-002
Special Tests & Provisions
MATERIAL WEAKNESSQUESTIONED COSTS

During audit testing of patient eligibility and sliding fee scale application, supporting documentation of income was not available for 25 of 40 patients sampled. As a result, the health center was unable to demonstrate that the sliding fee discounts were appropriately determined in accordance with program requirements. Cause: Per HRSA and UDS requirements, FQHC’s must determine patient eligibility for the sliding fee discount based on income and family size, and retain documentation to support income verification for each patient applying for the discount. Effect: As a result, the health center is in noncompliance with HRSA sliding fee discount program requirements, which represents a material weakness in internal control over compliance and results in an increased risk that patients received sliding fee discounts for which they were not eligible or that eligible patients were improperly classified, and that Uniform Data System (UDS) data related to patient income levels and sliding fee discount utilization may be materially misstated. Questioned Costs: Questioned costs could not be determined due to the lack of supporting documentation for the affected patients. Recommendation: We recommend that management reinforce policies requiring documentation of income and family size before applying sliding fee discounts, implement periodic review of patient files to ensure compliance, provide staff training, and accountability measures for intake procedures, and consider adding monitoring on a quarterly basis to ensure ongoing adherence.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Criteria: Federal regulations require non-federal entities to maintain records that adequately support allowable costs and program activities. Specifically, 2 CFR 200.302 requires financial management systems to provide accurate, current, and complete disclosure of financial results, and 2 CFR 200.403 requires that costs charged to federal awards be allowable, reasonable, and adequately documented. HRSA program requirements further require health centers to maintain patient-level documentation to support reported encounters and costs. Condition: During audit testing of patient eligibility and sliding fee scale application, supporting documentation of income was not available for 25 of 40 patients sampled. As a result, the health center was unable to demonstrate that the sliding fee discounts were appropriately determined in accordance with program requirements. Cause: Per HRSA and UDS requirements, FQHC’s must determine patient eligibility for the sliding fee discount based on income and family size, and retain documentation to support income verification for each patient applying for the discount. Effect: As a result, the health center is in noncompliance with HRSA sliding fee discount program requirements, which represents a material weakness in internal control over compliance and results in an increased risk that patients received sliding fee discounts for which they were not eligible or that eligible patients were improperly classified, and that Uniform Data System (UDS) data related to patient income levels and sliding fee discount utilization may be materially misstated. Questioned Costs: Questioned costs could not be determined due to the lack of supporting documentation for the affected patients. Recommendation: We recommend that management reinforce policies requiring documentation of income and family size before applying sliding fee discounts, implement periodic review of patient files to ensure compliance, provide staff training, and accountability measures for intake procedures, and consider adding monitoring on a quarterly basis to ensure ongoing adherence.

Corrective Action Plan

The Senior Accounting and Finance Director and the Director of Operations have scheduled a weekly meeting to address training needs for front-line staff and to develop methods for monitoring data collection and ensuring accountability for data entry. Although procedures and training manuals were developed, staff turnover resulted in the processes and procedures not being consistently followed.

About Special Tests and Provisions →
2025-003
Reporting
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY

The health center did not provide a report or reconciliation that ties source data to the totals reported in UDS Table 4 – Selected Patient Characteristics. Management provided a report based on billable visits and patients only, which excluded visits and patients for which no charge was associated. Management stated that UDS data are pulled directly from the electronic health record system (eClinicalWorks) by the compliance department using system mapping that differs from billing reports, and that the mapping will not change. As a result, the auditors were unable to verify that all patients required to be included in Table 4 were captured and accurately reported. Cause: The health center did not have documentation available to validate the accuracy and completeness of the UDS Table 4 data. Effect: Because a reconciliation or alternative audit trail was not available, the auditors were unable to determine whether UDS Table 4 data were complete and accurate, including whether non-billable patients were appropriately included. This condition increases the risk that the UDS report contains incomplete or inaccurate patient characteristic data, which may affect HRSA’s oversight, monitoring, and funding determinations. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs are reported for this finding, as the UDS report represents programmatic reporting and does not directly result in identifiable questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend that management establish and document controls over UDS reporting, including developing reconciliations or alternative audit trails that demonstrate completeness of patient populations reported in Table 4, documenting system mapping and logic used to generate UDS data, and implementing management review procedures prior to UDS submission.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Criteria: Federal regulations require non-federal entities to maintain records that adequately support federal program reporting. Specifically, 2 CFR 200.302 requires recipients to maintain financial and programmatic records that provide accurate, current, and complete disclosure of program results, and 2 CFR 200.333 requires records to be retained and available for audit. HRSA Health Center Program requirements further require health centers to maintain documentation supporting data reported in the Uniform Data System (UDS), including patient-level records supporting Table 4 – Selected Patient Characteristics. Condition: The health center did not provide a report or reconciliation that ties source data to the totals reported in UDS Table 4 – Selected Patient Characteristics. Management provided a report based on billable visits and patients only, which excluded visits and patients for which no charge was associated. Management stated that UDS data are pulled directly from the electronic health record system (eClinicalWorks) by the compliance department using system mapping that differs from billing reports, and that the mapping will not change. As a result, the auditors were unable to verify that all patients required to be included in Table 4 were captured and accurately reported. Cause: The health center did not have documentation available to validate the accuracy and completeness of the UDS Table 4 data. Effect: Because a reconciliation or alternative audit trail was not available, the auditors were unable to determine whether UDS Table 4 data were complete and accurate, including whether non-billable patients were appropriately included. This condition increases the risk that the UDS report contains incomplete or inaccurate patient characteristic data, which may affect HRSA’s oversight, monitoring, and funding determinations. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs are reported for this finding, as the UDS report represents programmatic reporting and does not directly result in identifiable questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend that management establish and document controls over UDS reporting, including developing reconciliations or alternative audit trails that demonstrate completeness of patient populations reported in Table 4, documenting system mapping and logic used to generate UDS data, and implementing management review procedures prior to UDS submission.

Corrective Action Plan

The organization has developed and implemented a standardized documentation process to ensure that all data submitted is fully supported and traceable to source documentation. Responsible staff have been trained to retain and reference appropriate supporting records for each data element prior to submission. A supervisory review step has been added to verify that documentation is complete, accurate, and clearly tied to the reported data before final submission.

About Reporting →

FY 2024-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$2,750,009 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 26, 2024 — management decision was due May 26, 2025.

FY 2023-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$4,368,761 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 27, 2023 — management decision was due May 27, 2024.

FY 2022-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$4,516,823 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on December 4, 2022 — management decision was due June 4, 2023.

FY 2021-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$4,057,615 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 29, 2021 — management decision was due May 29, 2022.

FY 2020-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$2,980,717 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 19, 2020 — management decision was due May 19, 2021.

FY 2019-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$2,601,460 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on January 21, 2020 — management decision was due July 21, 2020.

FY 2018-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$2,429,349 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 13, 2018 — management decision was due May 13, 2019.

FY 2017-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$2,501,254 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on December 13, 2017 — management decision was due June 13, 2018.

FY 2016-05-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$1,937,607 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on November 3, 2016 — management decision was due May 3, 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 Virginia

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 filing records.

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.