EIN: 566001526
UEI: T3BUM1CVS9N5
Audited by: CHERRY BEKAERT LLP
Oversight agency: 21 [Department of the Treasury]
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 February 20, 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 August 20, 2026 (15 days ago).
What is a management decision? →FAC accepted this audit on December 11, 2024 — management decision was due June 11, 2025.
FAC accepted this audit on December 12, 2023 — management decision was due June 12, 2024.
FAC accepted this audit on December 13, 2022 — management decision was due June 13, 2023.
FAC accepted this audit on January 12, 2022 — management decision was due July 12, 2022.
FAC accepted this audit on January 11, 2021 — management decision was due July 11, 2021.
There were six out of 60 participants tested with errors noted below. All were determined to have properly been eligible. Context: The following are the details of the errors noted on the participants selected for testing: ? There was one instance where the DMV in OVS/OLV did not agree to the information entered into NCFAST. ? There were two instances where income determination (earned or unearned income) was incorrectly calculating the client?s income, but was still within the proper Medicaid class. ? There was one instance where the household count improperly included an additional member of the household that should not have been during the period tested. ? There was one instance in which the IV-D referral was never sent by the County in order to properly determine if the participant was in cooperation with child support. Upon reexamination of each of the files listed above, the County was able to substantiate that all of the recipients were eligible to receive Medicaid benefits. This was accomplished by such means as re-computation of the budget by retrieving the online verification form (OLV) which matched the Medicaid Coverage period to ensure all appropriate income sources were included in the computation. Known Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs as the individuals were eligible for Medicaid services being provided and there were no improper payments. Effect: By not having the required documentation in the files or information being incorrectly documented, eligibility cannot be readily substantiated and there is a risk that the County could provide funding to individuals who are not eligible. Cause: Workers attention to detail and insuring that all OVS/OLV/AVS results are run and that staff are aware and able to troubleshoot the results that are inconclusive. Workers attention to certification period based on type of Medicaid being approved. Recommendation: Although these issues will occur from time to time considering the volume of case files that the County processes and maintains, we recommend that procedures be reinforced in order to ensure that all proper documentation is kept and maintained in the case file in an attempt to prevent loose filings resulting in missing documentation. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed through N.C. Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Social Services Program Name: Medical Assistance Program (Medicaid; Title XIX) CFDA#: 93.778 Finding 2020-001 Nonmaterial Noncompliance ? Eligibility Criteria: The County should have adequate monitoring controls to ensure that all information is updated appropriately in recipient?s files and in the NCFast system, and to ensure that all required physical documentation is located in the file to properly document eligibility with program requirements. Condition: There were six out of 60 participants tested with errors noted below. All were determined to have properly been eligible. Context: The following are the details of the errors noted on the participants selected for testing: ? There was one instance where the DMV in OVS/OLV did not agree to the information entered into NCFAST. ? There were two instances where income determination (earned or unearned income) was incorrectly calculating the client?s income, but was still within the proper Medicaid class. ? There was one instance where the household count improperly included an additional member of the household that should not have been during the period tested. ? There was one instance in which the IV-D referral was never sent by the County in order to properly determine if the participant was in cooperation with child support. Upon reexamination of each of the files listed above, the County was able to substantiate that all of the recipients were eligible to receive Medicaid benefits. This was accomplished by such means as re-computation of the budget by retrieving the online verification form (OLV) which matched the Medicaid Coverage period to ensure all appropriate income sources were included in the computation. Known Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs as the individuals were eligible for Medicaid services being provided and there were no improper payments. Effect: By not having the required documentation in the files or information being incorrectly documented, eligibility cannot be readily substantiated and there is a risk that the County could provide funding to individuals who are not eligible. Cause: Workers attention to detail and insuring that all OVS/OLV/AVS results are run and that staff are aware and able to troubleshoot the results that are inconclusive. Workers attention to certification period based on type of Medicaid being approved. Recommendation: Although these issues will occur from time to time considering the volume of case files that the County processes and maintains, we recommend that procedures be reinforced in order to ensure that all proper documentation is kept and maintained in the case file in an attempt to prevent loose filings resulting in missing documentation. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Finding 2020-001 Name of Contact Person: Michelle Hinshaw, Income Maintenance Administrator Corrective Action: The County will continue to complete monthly second party and peer to peer reviews of the work completed by caseworkers to ensure that any errors found are corrected immediately. The county will review Family and Children's Medicaid Policy Manual Sections including MAGI income calculation policy MA 3305, MAGI household composition policy MA 3306, and IV-D referral policy MA 3365. Proposed Completion Date: February 28, 2021
2019-003
FAC accepted this audit on November 19, 2019 — management decision was due May 19, 2020.
We noted two instances in which corrective action on eligibility cases selected by the County?s Quality Assurance Department were not remediated during the fiscal year. Context: Out of 60 cases tested for eligibility, two cases had case files that did not meet the County?s documentation and process standards. Corrections to these cases were made approximately 12 months after the date of review. Known Questioned Costs: There are no questioned costs as the individuals were eligible for services being provided and there were no improper payments. Effect: Case files were incomplete or did not adhere to the County?s policies or procedures. Cause: The County did not follow their policy on when remediation must occur. Recommendation: We recommend that the County implement a policy to ensure cases selected for quality review are remediated in a timely manner. Best practices in this regard are within 30 days. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed through N.C. Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Social Services Program Name: Medical Assistance Program (Medicaid; Title XIX) CFDA#: 93.778 Finding: 2019-002 Significant Deficiency ? Eligibility (Federal and State) Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with Section 200.303 of the Uniform Grant Guidance, each non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the federal award that provides assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: We noted two instances in which corrective action on eligibility cases selected by the County?s Quality Assurance Department were not remediated during the fiscal year. Context: Out of 60 cases tested for eligibility, two cases had case files that did not meet the County?s documentation and process standards. Corrections to these cases were made approximately 12 months after the date of review. Known Questioned Costs: There are no questioned costs as the individuals were eligible for services being provided and there were no improper payments. Effect: Case files were incomplete or did not adhere to the County?s policies or procedures. Cause: The County did not follow their policy on when remediation must occur. Recommendation: We recommend that the County implement a policy to ensure cases selected for quality review are remediated in a timely manner. Best practices in this regard are within 30 days. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Finding 2019-002 Name of Contact Person: Michelle Hinshaw Corrective Action: After monthly second party case reviews are completed, the Medicaid supervisor will discuss errors found during the case review with the Medicaid caseworker. The supervisor will ensure that corrections are made within 30 days from the date of the finding. Error correction will be documented on the ?Second Party Review Errors? spreadsheet. Proposed Completion Date: 11/22/2019
We noted one instance in which income was incorrectly documented with the NCFast system. Context: Out of the 60 cases tested, we noted one of the files had incorrect income documented in NCFast. The income support provided by the applicant showed income of $1,447.87 per month but the income entered into NCFast was $751.10 per month. Based on this error, the applicant received MAFCN and should have received MPW. Known Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs as the individual was eligible for Medicaid services being provided and there were no improper payments. Effect: By information being incorrectly documented, eligibility cannot be readily substantiated and there is a risk that the County could provide funding to individuals who are not eligible. Cause: Caseworker oversite. Recommendation: Although these issues will occur from time to time considering the volume of case files that the County processes and maintains, we recommend that procedures be reinforced in order to ensure that all proper documentation is kept and maintained in the case file. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed through N.C. Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Social Services Program Name: Medical Assistance Program (Medicaid; Title XIX) CFDA#: 93.778 Finding 2019-003 Nonmaterial Noncompliance ? Eligibility Criteria: The County should have adequate monitoring controls to ensure that all information is updated appropriately in recipient?s files and in the NCFast system, and to ensure that all required physical documentation is located in the file to properly document eligibility with program requirements. Condition: We noted one instance in which income was incorrectly documented with the NCFast system. Context: Out of the 60 cases tested, we noted one of the files had incorrect income documented in NCFast. The income support provided by the applicant showed income of $1,447.87 per month but the income entered into NCFast was $751.10 per month. Based on this error, the applicant received MAFCN and should have received MPW. Known Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs as the individual was eligible for Medicaid services being provided and there were no improper payments. Effect: By information being incorrectly documented, eligibility cannot be readily substantiated and there is a risk that the County could provide funding to individuals who are not eligible. Cause: Caseworker oversite. Recommendation: Although these issues will occur from time to time considering the volume of case files that the County processes and maintains, we recommend that procedures be reinforced in order to ensure that all proper documentation is kept and maintained in the case file. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Finding 2019-003 Name of Contact Person: Michelle Hinshaw Corrective Action: Medicaid training will be completed to review policy sections 3240 and 3421 of the Family and Children?s Medicaid Manual. Proposed Completion Date: 12/20/2019
FAC accepted this audit on December 6, 2018 — management decision was due June 6, 2019.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴FAC accepted this audit on January 1, 2018 — management decision was due July 1, 2018.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-001
FAC accepted this audit on December 15, 2016 — management decision was due June 15, 2017.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-001
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 North Carolina →
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →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 →
© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.