EIN: 550661130
UEI: FP3LNKEPD7H9
Audit also covers 2 related EINs: 464853541, 814157978 · unlinked EINs have no separate FAC filing
Audited by: S.R. SNODGRASS, P.C. D/B/A S.R. SNODGRASS, A.C.
Oversight agency: 93 [Department of Health and Human Services]
View federal awards & risk assessment →
Data as of September 2, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on July 9, 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 January 9, 2027 (128 days from today).
What is a management decision? →FAC accepted this audit on August 26, 2025 — management decision was due February 26, 2026.
FAC accepted this audit on September 23, 2024 — management decision was due March 23, 2025.
FAC accepted this audit on August 6, 2023 — management decision was due February 6, 2024.
FAC accepted this audit on July 14, 2022 — management decision was due January 14, 2023.
FAC accepted this audit on July 22, 2021 — management decision was due January 22, 2022.
FAC accepted this audit on July 20, 2020 — management decision was due January 20, 2021.
Internal controls over the CSBG income eligibility determination process do not appear adequate to ensure that only participants eligible under the CSBG guidelines will be served. Controls also failed to detect errors in certain income eligibility calculations and documentation. Criteria: Internal controls, such as a review of participant files for proper income documentation and support, as well as calculations for income eligibility, should be in place to ensure that adequate supporting documentation is maintained in participant files to support CSBG income eligibility criteria. Cause: Proper procedures were not established and maintained to ensure that a review of client income documentation and calculations related to the eligibility process were performed on a regular basis. Changes in procedures and certain oversight responsibilities were made during the year that resulted in errors and documentation exceptions not being detected in a timely manner. Effect: Documentation required to be maintained for each applicant for CSBG services, including copies of documents submitted by the applicants relating to their eligibility for CSBG services, was insufficient or contained errors in several of the client files selected for testing. While this did not result in material questioned costs in the current period, lack of proper controls over eligibility procedures could result in future questioned costs that could be material to the program. Review of income calculations was also not always evident, as errors were noted in several files tested as well. As indicated, we did identify some clients in our review that did not meet established income guidelines and who received CSBG services. The value of those services received as well as our analysis of the impact on the total CSBG program resulted in estimated expenses that would not be material to the CSBG program. Recommendation: Community Resources, Inc. should design adequate internal controls to ensure that CSBG participant files are being reviewed by an employee, independent of the employee that completed the eligibility determination. The review should specifically ensure that all required documents are maintained with the participant files and that participants are determined to be eligible to receive CSBG assistance. A sign-off in the file should support that the file was independently verified and that the reviewer concurs with the staff person who made the eligibility determination initially and certified to that effect in the file. Any errors would be immediately investigated and resolved to help prevent ineligible clients from being served.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Condition: Internal controls over the CSBG income eligibility determination process do not appear adequate to ensure that only participants eligible under the CSBG guidelines will be served. Controls also failed to detect errors in certain income eligibility calculations and documentation. Criteria: Internal controls, such as a review of participant files for proper income documentation and support, as well as calculations for income eligibility, should be in place to ensure that adequate supporting documentation is maintained in participant files to support CSBG income eligibility criteria. Cause: Proper procedures were not established and maintained to ensure that a review of client income documentation and calculations related to the eligibility process were performed on a regular basis. Changes in procedures and certain oversight responsibilities were made during the year that resulted in errors and documentation exceptions not being detected in a timely manner. Effect: Documentation required to be maintained for each applicant for CSBG services, including copies of documents submitted by the applicants relating to their eligibility for CSBG services, was insufficient or contained errors in several of the client files selected for testing. While this did not result in material questioned costs in the current period, lack of proper controls over eligibility procedures could result in future questioned costs that could be material to the program. Review of income calculations was also not always evident, as errors were noted in several files tested as well. As indicated, we did identify some clients in our review that did not meet established income guidelines and who received CSBG services. The value of those services received as well as our analysis of the impact on the total CSBG program resulted in estimated expenses that would not be material to the CSBG program. Recommendation: Community Resources, Inc. should design adequate internal controls to ensure that CSBG participant files are being reviewed by an employee, independent of the employee that completed the eligibility determination. The review should specifically ensure that all required documents are maintained with the participant files and that participants are determined to be eligible to receive CSBG assistance. A sign-off in the file should support that the file was independently verified and that the reviewer concurs with the staff person who made the eligibility determination initially and certified to that effect in the file. Any errors would be immediately investigated and resolved to help prevent ineligible clients from being served.
Management Response: The organization has gone through a high turnover rate in 2019 in the intake staff for CSBG. With the change in CSBG Director in 2020, a quality review process on client intake and files was implemented. The CSBG Program Director assigned staff that would do internal reviews of randomly selected files on a monthly basis for each of the eleven counties served. This will ensure compliance is being met throughout the year. If corrective action is needed, it can be made in a timely manner and additional trainings can be provided to strengthen our control procedures. Management feels the employees currently in place are much more comfortable with intakes and income verifications and, with the review process, these things can be addressed quickly.
FAC accepted this audit on September 22, 2019 — management decision was due March 22, 2020.
FAC accepted this audit on July 12, 2018 — management decision was due January 12, 2019.
FAC accepted this audit on July 19, 2017 — management decision was due January 19, 2018.
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 West 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.