EIN: 576000401
UEI: FKB5NLF42L15
Data as of August 26, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on December 29, 2025. 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 June 29, 2026 (59 days ago).
What is a management decision? →CONDITION: It was noted that the County was not always following its expenditure policies and procedures. During our testing we noted several instances where a contract was not in place for consulting work that detailed the scope of the work to be performed and the rates to be charged. CRITERIA: All consulting items charged to the WIOA program should be supported by properly approved contracts or agreements that agree to the amount being charged. CONTEXT, CAUSE, AND EFFECT: While performing our testing we noted that there were not approved agreements for consulting work charged to the WIOA program as the amounts charged were not substantiated by a signed agreement between the consultant and the County. The County’s policies require a signed agreement to be in place to support all amounts spent for consultants. All amounts that were charged to the WIOA program were proper; however, the County should be following their internal policies. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the County follow its internal control policies and procedures. RESPONSE: The County agrees with this finding and will adhere to the corrective action plan on page 14.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴CONDITION: It was noted that the County was not always following its expenditure policies and procedures. During our testing we noted several instances where a contract was not in place for consulting work that detailed the scope of the work to be performed and the rates to be charged. CRITERIA: All consulting items charged to the WIOA program should be supported by properly approved contracts or agreements that agree to the amount being charged. CONTEXT, CAUSE, AND EFFECT: While performing our testing we noted that there were not approved agreements for consulting work charged to the WIOA program as the amounts charged were not substantiated by a signed agreement between the consultant and the County. The County’s policies require a signed agreement to be in place to support all amounts spent for consultants. All amounts that were charged to the WIOA program were proper; however, the County should be following their internal policies. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the County follow its internal control policies and procedures. RESPONSE: The County agrees with this finding and will adhere to the corrective action plan on page 14.
CONTACT PERSON: Dana Hudgins, Executive Director Upstate Workforce Board 864-596-2028 dana@upstatewb.org CORRECTIVE ACTION: The County will follow its internal control policies and procedures. Effective immediately, all agreements between the County and its consultant for the WIOA program will be updated and signed. PROPOSED COMPLETION DATE: June 30, 2026
FAC accepted this audit on March 28, 2024 — management decision was due September 28, 2024.
CONDITION: It was noted that the County was not always following its payroll policies and procedures. During our testing we noted several instances where a timesheet was not properly reviewed and two instances where the timesheet did not support the amounts charged to the program. CRITERIA: All payroll charged to the CDBG program should be supported by properly approved timesheets and should support the time that is being spent on the program. CONTEXT, CAUSE, AND EFFECT: While performing our testing we noted that there was a lack of review and or approval for Supervisor timesheets and one instance of a timesheet missing a supervisors approval. It was also noted that two time sheets did not tie to the amount charged to the CDBG program. The County was not having the supervisor timesheets reviewed and was not verifying that all time charged to the CDBG program was keyed in correctly. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the County follow its internal control policies and procedures. RESPONSE: The County agrees with this finding and will adhere to the corrective action plan on page 18.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴CONDITION: It was noted that the County was not always following its payroll policies and procedures. During our testing we noted several instances where a timesheet was not properly reviewed and two instances where the timesheet did not support the amounts charged to the program. CRITERIA: All payroll charged to the CDBG program should be supported by properly approved timesheets and should support the time that is being spent on the program. CONTEXT, CAUSE, AND EFFECT: While performing our testing we noted that there was a lack of review and or approval for Supervisor timesheets and one instance of a timesheet missing a supervisors approval. It was also noted that two time sheets did not tie to the amount charged to the CDBG program. The County was not having the supervisor timesheets reviewed and was not verifying that all time charged to the CDBG program was keyed in correctly. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the County follow its internal control policies and procedures. RESPONSE: The County agrees with this finding and will adhere to the corrective action plan on page 18.
FINDING: 2023-003 CONTACT PERSON: Kathy Rivers - Community Development Director / 864-595-5306 / krivers@spartanburgcounty.org CORRECTIVE ACTION: The County will follow its internal control policies and procedures. Effective immediately, all time sheets including the supervisor’s are being reviewed and verified that all time charged to the CDBG program is keyed in correctly. PROPOSED COMPLETION DATE: June 30, 2024
CONDITION: The County did not meet the timely expenditure requirement. CRITERIA: The County should maintain a timeliness ratio of 1.5% as of the annual report. CONTEXT, CAUSE, AND EFFECT: We noted during our review of CDBG program that the County had a timeliness ratio of 1.96%. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the County adhere to the period of performance requirements of the CDBG program. RESPONSE: The County agrees with this finding and will adhere to the corrective action plan on page 19.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴CONDITION: The County did not meet the timely expenditure requirement. CRITERIA: The County should maintain a timeliness ratio of 1.5% as of the annual report. CONTEXT, CAUSE, AND EFFECT: We noted during our review of CDBG program that the County had a timeliness ratio of 1.96%. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the County adhere to the period of performance requirements of the CDBG program. RESPONSE: The County agrees with this finding and will adhere to the corrective action plan on page 19.
FINDING: 2023-004 CONTACT PERSON: Kathy Rivers - Community Development Director / 864-595-5306 / krivers@spartanburgcounty.org CORRECTIVE ACTION: The County will work diligently to make every effort to meet HUD’s time expenditure requirements. PROPOSED COMPLETION DATE: June 30, 2024
FAC accepted this audit on March 1, 2023 — management decision was due September 1, 2023.
While the County complied with all other aspects of reporting for the program, the County did not comply with the performance reporting requirement noted above. This section of the quarterly reports submitted to Treasury were marked ?N/A?, and therefore lacked the required elements as listed above. Questioned Costs: None Context: As this is a new federal program (this is the second reporting year), the guidance from Treasury changed often. We observed that efforts were made to comply with reporting requirements, and this appeared to be an oversight. The quarterly reports were accepted by Treasury, with no further follow-up from them. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that it increases risk for action by the federal agency for contract noncompliance. Cause: Misunderstanding of grant contract performance reporting requirement. Recommendation: We recommend that the responsible report preparer create a template with the required reporting elements for the narrative portion. Each quarter the template can be updated with the appropriate wording, as required. In the User Guide ? Treasury?s Portal for Recipient Reporting, page 54, it suggests typing the information directly on screen or upload a document via the ?upload files? functionality on the website. We recommend this process begin with the first quarterly report filed in 2023, since all previously filed reports were accepted online and cannot be changed.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2022-001: US Department Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance Program CFDA Number: 21.023 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance Criteria: In the US Department of Treasury Reporting Guidance ? Emergency Rental Assistance Program, page 34, it requires recipients to provide a current performance narrative of 2,000 words or less describing the performance and accomplishments of the subject ERA project over the reporting period (which is quarterly). The narrative must include the following information: - Activities implemented and notable achievements over the calendar quarter - Activities planned for next quarter - Notable challenges and status of each challenge - Details on compliance/non-compliance issues and mitigation plans - Requests for additional assistance or guidance from Treasury - Other information, as appropriate. Condition: While the County complied with all other aspects of reporting for the program, the County did not comply with the performance reporting requirement noted above. This section of the quarterly reports submitted to Treasury were marked ?N/A?, and therefore lacked the required elements as listed above. Questioned Costs: None Context: As this is a new federal program (this is the second reporting year), the guidance from Treasury changed often. We observed that efforts were made to comply with reporting requirements, and this appeared to be an oversight. The quarterly reports were accepted by Treasury, with no further follow-up from them. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that it increases risk for action by the federal agency for contract noncompliance. Cause: Misunderstanding of grant contract performance reporting requirement. Recommendation: We recommend that the responsible report preparer create a template with the required reporting elements for the narrative portion. Each quarter the template can be updated with the appropriate wording, as required. In the User Guide ? Treasury?s Portal for Recipient Reporting, page 54, it suggests typing the information directly on screen or upload a document via the ?upload files? functionality on the website. We recommend this process begin with the first quarterly report filed in 2023, since all previously filed reports were accepted online and cannot be changed.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN Spartanburg County, South Carolina respectively submits the following corrective action plan for the year ended June 30, 2022: Name and address of independent accounting firm: Halliday, Schwartz & Co. 824 East Main St. Spartanburg, SC 29302 Audit period: June 30, 2022 The findings from the June 30, 2022 schedule of findings and questioned costs are discussed below. The findings are numbered consistently with the numbers assigned in the schedule. Section III: Federal Awards Findings Finding 2022-001: US Department of Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance Program CFDA Number: 21.023 Grant Award Number : Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance Criteria: In the US Department of Treasury Reporting Guidance - Emergency Rental Assistance Program, page 34, it requires recipients to provide a current performance narrative of 2,000 words or less describing the performance and accomplishments of the subject ERA project over the reporting period (which is quarterly). The narrative must include the following information: ? Activities implemented and notable achievements over the calendar quarter ? Activities planned for next quarter ? Notable challenges and status of each challenge ? Details on compliance/non-compliance issues and mitigation plans ? Requests for additional assistance or guidance from Treasury ? Other information, as appropriate. Condition: While the County complied with all other aspects of reporting for the program, the County did not comply with the performance reporting requirement noted above. This section of the quarterly reports submitted to Treasury were marked "N/A", and therefore lacked the required elements as listed above. Questioned Costs: None Context: As this is a new federal program (this is the second reporting year), the guidance from Treasury changed often. We observed that efforts were made to comply with reporting requirements, and this appeared to be an oversight. The quarterly reports were accepted by Treasury, with no further follow-up from them. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that it increases risk for action by the federal agency for contract noncompliance. Cause: Misunderstanding of grant contract performance reporting requirement. Recommendation: We recommend that the responsible report preparer create a template with the required reporting elements for the narrative portion. Each quarter the template can be updated with the appropriate wording, as required. In the User Guide - Treasury's Portal for Recipient Reporting, page 54, it suggests typing the information directly on screen or upload a document via the "upload fi les" functionality on the website. We recommend this process begin with the first quarterly report filed in 2023, since all previously filed reports were accepted online and cannot be changed. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January, 2023 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development
FAC accepted this audit on January 19, 2022 — management decision was due July 19, 2022.
While the County Clerk of Court did implement an excel spreadsheet to accumulate the form PAR data as recommended in the prior year, the spreadsheet was not accurately completed; therefore some allocated percentages of cost for compensation were reported incorrectly. Secondly, the column for health insurance on the annual report contained errors ? costs were reported for part-time employees that do not have health coverage and employees that were hired or terminated in the current year had health costs listed that were not properly allocated for the partial year. Questioned Costs: Unknown Context: While the County complied with the requirement to maintain records of employee time spent on Title IV-D casework by completing and maintaining forms PAR, the time data contained in the forms was not entered accurately into the excel spreadsheet that is used to accumulate time and calculate the percentage applicable to Title IV-D used on the annual report. As a result, some of the reported percentages were in error. Also, the annual report column for health insurance was prepared using an incorrect spreadsheet formula which overstated costs for part-time employees not covered by health insurance and overstated costs for employees that were hired or terminated during the year covered by the annual report. CSSD has reviewed reasonableness of time recorded compared to annual report twice yearly and has found no significant variances. This annual report is used by CSSD to calculate the annual unit cost reimbursement rate by combining Spartanburg County?s reported costs with all counties in SC to determine a state-wide reimbursement rate for the next fiscal year. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that the allocable payroll costs for each employee for Title IV-D could be either under or over-stated which would affect the overall calculation of the state-wide reimbursement rate. The dollar amount of this effect is unknown. Cause: The Clerk of Court?s office in Spartanburg County did not implement a proper review procedure of the data and worksheets supporting the annual report. Recommendation: We recommend that the Clerk of Court?s office of Spartanburg County implement a periodic review procedure which reconciles amounts reported by employees on forms PAR to the system of reporting accumulated time to make sure there are no errors in the percentages reported on the annual report. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: Going forward, the Clerk of Court will implement a revised Excel spreadsheet that simplifies the accumulation of Title IV-D percentage of hours for each reportable pay period. This new process should reduce the likelihood of errors in the accumulation of percentage data required for the annual report. As part of the spreadsheet entry process, the underlying forms PAR are reviewed for completeness and accuracy, which will occur monthly. Additionally, the person responsible for preparing the annual report will correct the method used to report the health insurance column to properly exclude costs for part-time employees and properly calculate health costs for those employees hired or terminated during the reporting period. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January 14, 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Clerk of Court, Spartanburg County
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2021-001: US Department of Health and Human Services Child Support Enforcement Title IV-D, CFDA Number: 93.563, Grant Award Number: 1901SCCES, Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs, Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance, Identification of Repeat Finding: Repeat finding of prior year 2020-001 Criteria: Articles IV and V of the contract with Child Support Services Division of the SC Department of Social Services (a.k.a. CSSD) require that the allocated percentage of costs for compensation for Title IVD reported on its annual report be calculated using time reported on the form Personnel Activity Report (PAR). Condition: While the County Clerk of Court did implement an excel spreadsheet to accumulate the form PAR data as recommended in the prior year, the spreadsheet was not accurately completed; therefore some allocated percentages of cost for compensation were reported incorrectly. Secondly, the column for health insurance on the annual report contained errors ? costs were reported for part-time employees that do not have health coverage and employees that were hired or terminated in the current year had health costs listed that were not properly allocated for the partial year. Questioned Costs: Unknown Context: While the County complied with the requirement to maintain records of employee time spent on Title IV-D casework by completing and maintaining forms PAR, the time data contained in the forms was not entered accurately into the excel spreadsheet that is used to accumulate time and calculate the percentage applicable to Title IV-D used on the annual report. As a result, some of the reported percentages were in error. Also, the annual report column for health insurance was prepared using an incorrect spreadsheet formula which overstated costs for part-time employees not covered by health insurance and overstated costs for employees that were hired or terminated during the year covered by the annual report. CSSD has reviewed reasonableness of time recorded compared to annual report twice yearly and has found no significant variances. This annual report is used by CSSD to calculate the annual unit cost reimbursement rate by combining Spartanburg County?s reported costs with all counties in SC to determine a state-wide reimbursement rate for the next fiscal year. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that the allocable payroll costs for each employee for Title IV-D could be either under or over-stated which would affect the overall calculation of the state-wide reimbursement rate. The dollar amount of this effect is unknown. Cause: The Clerk of Court?s office in Spartanburg County did not implement a proper review procedure of the data and worksheets supporting the annual report. Recommendation: We recommend that the Clerk of Court?s office of Spartanburg County implement a periodic review procedure which reconciles amounts reported by employees on forms PAR to the system of reporting accumulated time to make sure there are no errors in the percentages reported on the annual report. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: Going forward, the Clerk of Court will implement a revised Excel spreadsheet that simplifies the accumulation of Title IV-D percentage of hours for each reportable pay period. This new process should reduce the likelihood of errors in the accumulation of percentage data required for the annual report. As part of the spreadsheet entry process, the underlying forms PAR are reviewed for completeness and accuracy, which will occur monthly. Additionally, the person responsible for preparing the annual report will correct the method used to report the health insurance column to properly exclude costs for part-time employees and properly calculate health costs for those employees hired or terminated during the reporting period. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January 14, 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Clerk of Court, Spartanburg County
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN Spartanburg County, South Carolina respectively submits the following corrective action plan for the year ended June 30, 2021: Name and address of independent accounting firm: Halliday, Schwartz & Co. 824 East Main St. Spartanburg, SC 29302 Audit period: June 30, 2021 The findings from the June 30, 2021 schedule of findings and questioned costs are discussed below. The findings are numbered consistently with the numbers assigned in the schedule. Section Ill: Federal Awards Findings Finding 2021-001: US Department of Health and Human Services Child Support Enforcement Title IV-D CFDA Number: 93.563 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: Articles IV and V of the contract with Child Support Services Division of the SC Department of Social Services (a.k.a. CSSD) require that the allocated percentage of costs for compensation for Title !V- D reported on its annual report be calculated using time reported on the form Personnel Activity Report (PAR). Condition: While the County Clerk of Court did implement an excel spreadsheet to accumulate the form PAR data as recommended in the prior year, the spreadsheet was not accurately completed, therefore some allocated percentages of cost for compensation were reported incorrectly. Secondly, the column for health insurance on the annual report contained errors - costs were reported for part-time employees that do not have health coverage and employees that were hired or terminated in the current year had health costs listed that were not properly allocated for the partial year. Questioned Costs: Unknown Context: While the County complied with the requirement to maintain records of employee time spent on Title IV-D casework by completing and maintaining forms PAR, the time data contained in the forms was not entered accurately into the excel spreadsheet that is used to accumulate time and calculate the percentage applicable to Title IV-D used on the annual report. As a result, some of the reported percentages were in error. Also the annual report column for health insurance was prepared using an incorrect spreadsheet formula which overstated costs for part-time employees not covered by health insurance and overstated costs for employees that were hired or terminated during the year covered by the annual report. CSSD has reviewed reasonableness of time recorded compared to annual report twice yearly and has found no significant variances. This annual report is used by CSSD to calculate the annual unit cost reimbursement rate by combining Spartanburg County's reported costs with all counties in SC to determine a state-wide reimbursement rate for the next fiscal year. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that the allocable payroll costs for each employee for Title IV-D could be either under or over-stated which would affect the overall calculation of the state-wide reimbursement rate. The dollar amount of this effect is unknown. Cause: The Clerk of Court's office in Spartanburg County did not implement a proper review procedure of the data and worksheets supporting the annual report. Recommendation: We recommend that the Clerk of Court's office of Spartanburg County implement a periodic review procedure which reconciles amounts reported by employees on forms PAR to the system of reporting accumulated time to reduce the potential for errors in the percentages reported on the annual report. Responsible Official's Response and Corrective Action: Going forward, the Clerk of Court will implement a revised Excel spreadsheet that simplifies the accumulation of Title IV-D percentage of hours for each reportable pay period. This new process should reduce the likelihood of errors in the accumulation of percentage data required for the annual report. As part of the spreadsheet entry process, the underlying forms PAR are reviewed for completeness and accuracy, which will occur monthly. Additionally, the person responsible for preparing the annual report will correct the method used to report the health insurance column to properly exclude costs for part-time employees and properly calculate health costs for those employees hired or terminated during the reporting period. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January 14, 2022 Amy W. Cox Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Clerk of Court, Spartanburg County Clerk of Court, Spartanburg County acox@spartanburgcountv.om 864-596-3428 864-764-4760
2020-001
While the County has an informal procedure in place during the application process to assess compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy and underwriting requirement, there was no formal documentation that the required evaluation as noted above occurred. Questioned Costs: None Context: The County has a robust and detailed procedure for evaluating annual applications for HOME grant funding. Applications are rated and ranked by staff in Community Development, after which each application is assigned a suggested award amount. The suggested awards are then reviewed and approved by County Council Community Development Advisory Committee. The required Annual Action Plan, which lays out the planned grant projects and awards, is prepared and voted on by County Council and submitted to HUD for approval. The required calculation should be prepared and documented during the rating and ranking process, instead of informally concluding that each project meets the maximum per-unit subsidy requirement. The lack of documentation for the evaluation has caused the finding. We noted that HUD does approve all projects prior to their start date via the Annual Plan that is submitted to HUD, so there is not an issue with the projects themselves, but rather a lack of required documentation. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of noncompliance noted above is there is a possibility that a project might exceed the required per-unit maximum subsidy and not be detected. Cause: The Community Development ratings and ranking process does not include required documentation of the maximum per-unit subsidy by project. Recommendation: We recommend that Community Development staff incorporate formal documentation in the ratings and ranking process of the compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy calculation requirement. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: The staff of Community Development will incorporate formal documentation in the ratings and ranking process of the compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy calculation requirement. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January, 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2021-002: US Department of Housing and Urban Development HOME Investment Partnerships Program, CFDA Number: 14.239, Grant Award Number : Multiple Awards, Compliance Requirement: Special Tests and Provisions, Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: Participating jurisdictions should have records to support that each housing project was evaluated to ensure that the combination of federal assistance to the project is not any more than is the FHA mortgage limit in Subsection 221(d)(3) (i.e., 234) of the National Housing Act necessary to provide affordable housing. Condition: While the County has an informal procedure in place during the application process to assess compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy and underwriting requirement, there was no formal documentation that the required evaluation as noted above occurred. Questioned Costs: None Context: The County has a robust and detailed procedure for evaluating annual applications for HOME grant funding. Applications are rated and ranked by staff in Community Development, after which each application is assigned a suggested award amount. The suggested awards are then reviewed and approved by County Council Community Development Advisory Committee. The required Annual Action Plan, which lays out the planned grant projects and awards, is prepared and voted on by County Council and submitted to HUD for approval. The required calculation should be prepared and documented during the rating and ranking process, instead of informally concluding that each project meets the maximum per-unit subsidy requirement. The lack of documentation for the evaluation has caused the finding. We noted that HUD does approve all projects prior to their start date via the Annual Plan that is submitted to HUD, so there is not an issue with the projects themselves, but rather a lack of required documentation. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of noncompliance noted above is there is a possibility that a project might exceed the required per-unit maximum subsidy and not be detected. Cause: The Community Development ratings and ranking process does not include required documentation of the maximum per-unit subsidy by project. Recommendation: We recommend that Community Development staff incorporate formal documentation in the ratings and ranking process of the compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy calculation requirement. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: The staff of Community Development will incorporate formal documentation in the ratings and ranking process of the compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy calculation requirement. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January, 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN Spartanburg County, South Carolina respectively submits the following corrective action plan for the year ended June 30, 2021: Name and address of independent accounting firm: Halliday, Schwartz & Co. 824 East Main St. Spartanburg, SC 29302 Audit period: June 30, 2021 The findings from the June 30, 2021 schedule of findings and questioned costs are discussed below. The findings are numbered consistently with the numbers assigned in the schedule. Section Ill: Federal Awards Findings Finding 2021-002: US Department of Housing and Urban Development HOME Investment Partnerships Program CFDA Number: 14.239 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: Participating jurisdictions should have records to support that each housing project was evaluated to ensure that the combination of federal assistance to the project is not any more than is the FHA mortgage limit in Subsection 221(d)(3) (i.e., 234) of the National Housing Act necessary to provide affordable housing. Condition: While the County has an informal procedure in place during the application process to assess compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy and underwriting requirement, there was no formal documentation that the required evaluation as noted above occurred. Questioned Costs: None Context: The County has a robust and detailed procedure for evaluating annual applications for HOME grant funding. Applications are rated and ranked by staff in Community Development after which each application is assigned a suggested award amount. The suggested awards are then reviewed and approved by the County Council's appointed Community Development Advisory Committee. The required Annual Action Plan, which lays out the planned grant projects and awards, is prepared and voted on by County Council and submitted to HUD for approval. The required calculation should be prepared and documented during the rating and ranking process instead of informally concluding that each project meets the maximum per-unit subsidy requirement. The lack of documentation for the evaluation has caused the finding. We noted that HUD does approve all projects prior to their start date via the Annual Plan that is submitted to HUD; so, there is not an issue with the projects themselves, but rather a lack of required documentation. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of noncompliance noted above is there is a possibility that a project might exceed the required per-unit maximum subsidy and not be detected. Cause: The Community Development ratings and ranking process does not include required documentation of the maximum per-unit subsidy by project. Recommendation: We recommend that Community Development staff incorporate formal documentation in the rating and ranking process to document compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy calculation requirement. Responsible Official's Response and Corrective Action: The staff of Community Development will incorporate formal documentation in the rating and ranking process to document compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy calculation requirement. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development Finding 2021-003: US Department of Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance Program CFDA Number: 21.023 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Cash Management Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: Under 2 CFR section 200.305(b)(1) of federal law governing cash management, pass-through entities must monitor cash drawdowns by their subrecipients to ensure that the time elapsing between the transfer of federal funds to the subrecipient and their disbursement for program purposes is minimized. Condition: There is a lack of documentation that drawdown requests by subrecipients against their contracted award amounts were compared to weekly reports by subrecipients of their disbursements to beneficiaries in order to properly minimize the time elapsing between subrecipients' receipt of funds and ultimate disbursements to beneficiaries. Current procedure could allow a subrecipient to accumulate excess federal funds. Questioned Costs: None Context: The Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) was a new program which began in January 2021. The program, when created, had very little legislative guidance. The US Department of Treasury (USDT) made several changes in program eligibility, required beneficiary documentation, and reporting requirements over a short timeframe. The only source of guidance published was a "frequently asked questions" page on its website. An examination of material on the USDT website reveals a push for all recipients to disburse funds as quickly as possible, an action which resulted in several changes in less documentation required from beneficiaries. The contract with USDT states that the grant is subject to the general requirements under 2 CFR section 200. While the County was diligent in its processes to execute the proper documentation for use by its subrecipients and in the execution of proper legal contracts with its subrecipients, it neglected to implement a procedure to comply with the cash management compliance requirement for its subrecipients. The short timeframe and frequent modifications to requirements by the USDT could have contributed to this oversight. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of noncompliance noted above is that a subrecipient may improperly accumulate excess federal funds. Cause: There is a lack of documented procedure to compare drawdown requests by subrecipients to their weekly reports of their disbursements to beneficiaries over a reasonable period of time to keep the drawdowns to the minimum amount required to disburse to future beneficiary applicants. Recommendation: We recommend that Community Development staff institute a monitoring process whereby the Fiscal Coordinator will compare the variance between subrecipient advancements and disbursements to beneficiaries on a monthly basis. This process will include interviews with each subrecipient to determine and document reasons for variances recorded in a report format to be determined in order to properly monitor for any overfunding that could occur. Responsible Official's Response and Corrective Action: The staff of Community Development will institute a monitoring process whereby the Fiscal Coordinator will compare the variance between subrecipient advancements and disbursements to beneficiaries on a monthly basis. This process will include interviews with each subrecipient to determine and document reasons for variances recorded in a report format to be determined in order to properly monitor for any overfunding that could occur. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development
There is a lack of documentation that drawdown requests by subrecipients against their contracted award amounts were compared to weekly reports by subrecipients of their disbursements to beneficiaries in order to properly minimize the time elapsing between subrecipients? receipt of funds and ultimate disbursements to beneficiaries. Current procedure could allow subrecipient to accumulate excess federal funds. Questioned Costs: None Context: The Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) was a new program which began in January 2021. The program, when created, had very little legislative guidance. The US Department of Treasury made several changes in program eligibility, required beneficiary documentation, and reporting requirements over a short time frame. The only source of guidance published was a ?frequently asked questions? page on its website. An examination of material on the USDT website reveals a push for all recipients to disburse funds as quickly as possible, which resulted in several changes in less documentation required from beneficiaries. The contract with USDT states that the grant is subject to the general requirements under 2 CFR section 200. While the County was diligent in its processes to execute the proper documentation for use by its subrecipients and in the execution of proper legal contracts with its subrecipients, it neglected to implement a procedure to comply with the cash management compliance requirement for its subrecipients. The short time frame and frequent modifications to requirements by the USDT could have contributed to this oversight. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of noncompliance noted above is that a subrecipient may improperly accumulate excess federal funds. Cause: There is a lack of a procedure to compare drawdown requests by subrecipients to their weekly reports of their disbursements to beneficiaries over a reasonable period of time to keep the drawdowns to the minimum amount required to disburse to future beneficiary applicants. Recommendation: We recommend that Community Development staff institute a monitoring process whereby the Fiscal Coordinator will compare the variance between subrecipient funding and disbursements to beneficiaries on a monthly basis. This process will include interviews with each subrecipient to determine and document reasons for variances in a report format to be determined in order to properly monitor for any overfunding that could occur. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: The staff of Community Development will institute a monitoring process whereby the Fiscal Coordinator will compare the variance between subrecipient funding and disbursements to beneficiaries on a monthly basis. This process will include interviews with each subrecipient to determine and document reasons for variances in a report format to be determined to properly monitor for any overfunding that could occur. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January, 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2021-003: US Department of Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance Program, CFDA Number: 21.023, Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards, Compliance Requirement: Cash Management, Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: Under 2 CFR section 200.305(b)(1) of federal law governing cash management, pass-through entities must monitor cash drawdowns by their subrecipients to ensure that the time elapsing between the transfer of federal funds to the subrecipient and their disbursement for program purposes is minimized. Condition: There is a lack of documentation that drawdown requests by subrecipients against their contracted award amounts were compared to weekly reports by subrecipients of their disbursements to beneficiaries in order to properly minimize the time elapsing between subrecipients? receipt of funds and ultimate disbursements to beneficiaries. Current procedure could allow subrecipient to accumulate excess federal funds. Questioned Costs: None Context: The Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) was a new program which began in January 2021. The program, when created, had very little legislative guidance. The US Department of Treasury made several changes in program eligibility, required beneficiary documentation, and reporting requirements over a short time frame. The only source of guidance published was a ?frequently asked questions? page on its website. An examination of material on the USDT website reveals a push for all recipients to disburse funds as quickly as possible, which resulted in several changes in less documentation required from beneficiaries. The contract with USDT states that the grant is subject to the general requirements under 2 CFR section 200. While the County was diligent in its processes to execute the proper documentation for use by its subrecipients and in the execution of proper legal contracts with its subrecipients, it neglected to implement a procedure to comply with the cash management compliance requirement for its subrecipients. The short time frame and frequent modifications to requirements by the USDT could have contributed to this oversight. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of noncompliance noted above is that a subrecipient may improperly accumulate excess federal funds. Cause: There is a lack of a procedure to compare drawdown requests by subrecipients to their weekly reports of their disbursements to beneficiaries over a reasonable period of time to keep the drawdowns to the minimum amount required to disburse to future beneficiary applicants. Recommendation: We recommend that Community Development staff institute a monitoring process whereby the Fiscal Coordinator will compare the variance between subrecipient funding and disbursements to beneficiaries on a monthly basis. This process will include interviews with each subrecipient to determine and document reasons for variances in a report format to be determined in order to properly monitor for any overfunding that could occur. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: The staff of Community Development will institute a monitoring process whereby the Fiscal Coordinator will compare the variance between subrecipient funding and disbursements to beneficiaries on a monthly basis. This process will include interviews with each subrecipient to determine and document reasons for variances in a report format to be determined to properly monitor for any overfunding that could occur. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January, 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN Spartanburg County, South Carolina respectively submits the following corrective action plan for the year ended June 30, 2021: Name and address of independent accounting firm: Halliday, Schwartz & Co. 824 East Main St. Spartanburg, SC 29302 Audit period: June 30, 2021 The findings from the June 30, 2021 schedule of findings and questioned costs are discussed below. The findings are numbered consistently with the numbers assigned in the schedule. Section Ill: Federal Awards Findings Finding 2021-002: US Department of Housing and Urban Development HOME Investment Partnerships Program CFDA Number: 14.239 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: Participating jurisdictions should have records to support that each housing project was evaluated to ensure that the combination of federal assistance to the project is not any more than is the FHA mortgage limit in Subsection 221(d)(3) (i.e., 234) of the National Housing Act necessary to provide affordable housing. Condition: While the County has an informal procedure in place during the application process to assess compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy and underwriting requirement, there was no formal documentation that the required evaluation as noted above occurred. Questioned Costs: None Context: The County has a robust and detailed procedure for evaluating annual applications for HOME grant funding. Applications are rated and ranked by staff in Community Development after which each application is assigned a suggested award amount. The suggested awards are then reviewed and approved by the County Council's appointed Community Development Advisory Committee. The required Annual Action Plan, which lays out the planned grant projects and awards, is prepared and voted on by County Council and submitted to HUD for approval. The required calculation should be prepared and documented during the rating and ranking process instead of informally concluding that each project meets the maximum per-unit subsidy requirement. The lack of documentation for the evaluation has caused the finding. We noted that HUD does approve all projects prior to their start date via the Annual Plan that is submitted to HUD; so, there is not an issue with the projects themselves, but rather a lack of required documentation. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of noncompliance noted above is there is a possibility that a project might exceed the required per-unit maximum subsidy and not be detected. Cause: The Community Development ratings and ranking process does not include required documentation of the maximum per-unit subsidy by project. Recommendation: We recommend that Community Development staff incorporate formal documentation in the rating and ranking process to document compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy calculation requirement. Responsible Official's Response and Corrective Action: The staff of Community Development will incorporate formal documentation in the rating and ranking process to document compliance with the maximum per-unit subsidy calculation requirement. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development Finding 2021-003: US Department of Treasury Emergency Rental Assistance Program CFDA Number: 21.023 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Cash Management Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: Under 2 CFR section 200.305(b)(1) of federal law governing cash management, pass-through entities must monitor cash drawdowns by their subrecipients to ensure that the time elapsing between the transfer of federal funds to the subrecipient and their disbursement for program purposes is minimized. Condition: There is a lack of documentation that drawdown requests by subrecipients against their contracted award amounts were compared to weekly reports by subrecipients of their disbursements to beneficiaries in order to properly minimize the time elapsing between subrecipients' receipt of funds and ultimate disbursements to beneficiaries. Current procedure could allow a subrecipient to accumulate excess federal funds. Questioned Costs: None Context: The Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) was a new program which began in January 2021. The program, when created, had very little legislative guidance. The US Department of Treasury (USDT) made several changes in program eligibility, required beneficiary documentation, and reporting requirements over a short timeframe. The only source of guidance published was a "frequently asked questions" page on its website. An examination of material on the USDT website reveals a push for all recipients to disburse funds as quickly as possible, an action which resulted in several changes in less documentation required from beneficiaries. The contract with USDT states that the grant is subject to the general requirements under 2 CFR section 200. While the County was diligent in its processes to execute the proper documentation for use by its subrecipients and in the execution of proper legal contracts with its subrecipients, it neglected to implement a procedure to comply with the cash management compliance requirement for its subrecipients. The short timeframe and frequent modifications to requirements by the USDT could have contributed to this oversight. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of noncompliance noted above is that a subrecipient may improperly accumulate excess federal funds. Cause: There is a lack of documented procedure to compare drawdown requests by subrecipients to their weekly reports of their disbursements to beneficiaries over a reasonable period of time to keep the drawdowns to the minimum amount required to disburse to future beneficiary applicants. Recommendation: We recommend that Community Development staff institute a monitoring process whereby the Fiscal Coordinator will compare the variance between subrecipient advancements and disbursements to beneficiaries on a monthly basis. This process will include interviews with each subrecipient to determine and document reasons for variances recorded in a report format to be determined in order to properly monitor for any overfunding that could occur. Responsible Official's Response and Corrective Action: The staff of Community Development will institute a monitoring process whereby the Fiscal Coordinator will compare the variance between subrecipient advancements and disbursements to beneficiaries on a monthly basis. This process will include interviews with each subrecipient to determine and document reasons for variances recorded in a report format to be determined in order to properly monitor for any overfunding that could occur. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January 2022 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development Kathy Rivers, Director of Community Development
FAC accepted this audit on February 12, 2021 — management decision was due August 12, 2021.
The County did not use forms PAR to calculate and report the allocated percentage of costs for compensation on the annual report to CSSD. Questioned Costs: Unknown Context: While the County complied with the requirement to maintain records of employee time spent on Title IV-D casework by completing and maintaining forms PAR, the time data contained in the forms was not used to calculate the annual percentage for each employee reported on the annual report required by CSSD for the fiscal year. Rather, the percentages were estimated . CSSD has reviewed reasonableness of time recorded compared to annual report twice yearly and has found no significant variances. This annual report is used by CSSD to calculate the annual unit cost reimbursement rate by combining Spartanburg County's reported costs with all counties in SC to determine a state-wide reimbursement rate for the next fiscal year. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that the allocable payroll costs for each employee for Title IV-D could be either under or over-stated which would affect the overall calculation of the state-wide reimbursement rate . The dollar amount of this effect is unknown. Cause: The Clerk of Court's office in Spartanburg County does not have procedures in place to accumulate the data recorded on forms PAR so that an annual percentage for each employee can be calculated and reported accurately on the annual report nor a procedure in place for management review and approval of data used. Recommendation: We recommend that the Clerk of Court's office of Spartanburg County implement the use of an Excel spreadsheet to properly accumulate the PAR time sheet data so that accurate percentages of each employee's time spent on Title IV-D child support cases is calculated and correctly reported on the required annual report submitted to CSSD. The compiled data should be reviewed and approved by the Clerk of Court when preparing and submitting the annual report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-001 US Department of Health and Human Services Child Support Enforcement Title IV-D CFDA Number: 93.563 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: Articles IV and V of the contract with Child Support Services Division of the SC Department of Social Services (a.k.a. CSSD) require that the allocated percentage of costs for compensation for Title IV- D reported on its annual report be calculated using time reported on the form Personnel Activity Report (PAR). Condition: The County did not use forms PAR to calculate and report the allocated percentage of costs for compensation on the annual report to CSSD. Questioned Costs: Unknown Context: While the County complied with the requirement to maintain records of employee time spent on Title IV-D casework by completing and maintaining forms PAR, the time data contained in the forms was not used to calculate the annual percentage for each employee reported on the annual report required by CSSD for the fiscal year. Rather, the percentages were estimated . CSSD has reviewed reasonableness of time recorded compared to annual report twice yearly and has found no significant variances. This annual report is used by CSSD to calculate the annual unit cost reimbursement rate by combining Spartanburg County's reported costs with all counties in SC to determine a state-wide reimbursement rate for the next fiscal year. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that the allocable payroll costs for each employee for Title IV-D could be either under or over-stated which would affect the overall calculation of the state-wide reimbursement rate . The dollar amount of this effect is unknown. Cause: The Clerk of Court's office in Spartanburg County does not have procedures in place to accumulate the data recorded on forms PAR so that an annual percentage for each employee can be calculated and reported accurately on the annual report nor a procedure in place for management review and approval of data used. Recommendation: We recommend that the Clerk of Court's office of Spartanburg County implement the use of an Excel spreadsheet to properly accumulate the PAR time sheet data so that accurate percentages of each employee's time spent on Title IV-D child support cases is calculated and correctly reported on the required annual report submitted to CSSD. The compiled data should be reviewed and approved by the Clerk of Court when preparing and submitting the annual report.
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN Spartanburg County, South Carolina respectively submits the following corrective action plan for the year ended June 30, 2020: Name and address of independent accounting firm: Halliday, Schwartz & Co. 824 East Main St. Spartanburg, SC 29302 Audit period: June 30, 2020 The findings from the June 30, 2020 schedule of findings and questioned costs are discussed below. The findings are numbered consistently with the numbers assigned in the schedule. Section III: Federal Awards Findings Finding 2020-001: US Department of Health and Human Services Child Support Enforcement Title IV-D CFDA Number: 93.563 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: Articles IV and V of the contract with Child Support Services Division of the SC Department of Social Services (a.k.a. CSSD) require that the allocated percentage of costs for compensation for Title IV- D reported on its annual report be calculated using time reported on the form Personnel Activity Report (PAR). Condition: The County did not use forms PAR to calculate and report the allocated percentage of costs for compensation on the annual report to CSSD. Questioned Costs: Unknown Context: While the County complied with the requirement to maintain records of employee time spent on Title IV-D casework by completing and maintaining forms PAR, the time data contained in the forms was not used to calculate the annual percentage for each employee reported on the annual report required by CSSD for the fiscal year. Rather, the percentages were estimated . CSSD has reviewed reasonableness of time recorded compared to annual report twice yearly and has found no significant variances. This annual report is used by CSSD to calculate the annual unit cost reimbursement rate by combining Spartanburg County's reported costs with all counties in SC to determine a state-wide reimbursement rate for the next fiscal year. Effect or Potential Effect: The effect of the noncompliance noted above is that the allocable payroll costs for each employee for Title IV-D could be either under or over-stated which would affect the overall calculation of the state-wide reimbursement rate . The dollar amount of this effect is unknown. Cause: The Clerk of Court's office in Spartanburg County does not have procedures in place to accumulate the data recorded on forms PAR so that an annual percentage for each employee can be calculated and reported accurately on the annual report nor a procedure in place for management review and approval of data used. Recommendation: We recommend that the Clerk of Court's office of Spartanburg County implement the use of an Excel spreadsheet to properly accumulate the PAR time sheet data so that accurate percentages of each employee's time spent on Title IV-D child support cases is calculated and correctly reported on the required annual report submitted to CSSD. The compiled data should be reviewed and approved by the Clerk of Court when preparing and submitting the annual report. Responsible Official's Response and Corrective Action: When the noncompliance was discovered on January 12, 2021, the Clerk of Court immediately designed an Excel spreadsheet to accumulate the PAR time sheet data in order to facilitate the proper calculation of the annual percentage of each employee's time spent on Title IV-D cases for the fiscal year. The office of the Clerk of Court also immediately began the process of properly calculating the employee percentages that will be included on the annual report filing for the year ended June 30, 2020, which is due to CSSD in mid-January 2021. The office instituted a periodic review procedure to make sure the data accumulation spreadsheets are properly main1ained throughout the year. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: January 12, 2021 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Clerk of Court, Spartanburg County Amy Cox, Spartanburg County Clerk of Court
FAC accepted this audit on January 14, 2020 — management decision was due July 14, 2020.
Required reports have not been submitted to SC DEW on a timely basis. Questioned Costs: None Context: For the year ended June 30, 2019, 2 out of 12 monthly financial reports were not submitted to SC DEW by the 20th day of the month. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to timely file required reports to funding agencies could result in the suspension of its funding. Cause: County does not have a tracking system to ensure required reports are filed timely with various funding agencies. Recommendation: We recommend that the County implement a system of internal controls to monitor federal program reporting requirements to ensure compliance. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: The Deputy Finance Director and Chief Financial Officer at the Upstate Workforce Board strive to submit the financial status reports in a timely manner each month. Currently, monthly financial status reports are submitted to SC DEW by the reporting deadline. Each month, the Deputy Finance Director works with the Chief Financial Officer to ensure reports are reviewed and submitted by the reporting deadline. The Deputy Finance Director emails electronic copies of the financial status reports to SC DEW and copies the Chief Financial Officer on those emails. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: December 17, 2019 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Director of Budget and Finance
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴U.S. Department of Labor passed through S.C. Department of Employment and Workforce WIOA Cluster CFDA Number: 17.258, 17.259, 17.278 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Compliance (Other Matters) Criteria: SC DEW (SC Department of Employment and Workforce) requires monthly Financial Status Reports to be submitted by the 20th of the month following the expenditures for each grant. Condition: Required reports have not been submitted to SC DEW on a timely basis. Questioned Costs: None Context: For the year ended June 30, 2019, 2 out of 12 monthly financial reports were not submitted to SC DEW by the 20th day of the month. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to timely file required reports to funding agencies could result in the suspension of its funding. Cause: County does not have a tracking system to ensure required reports are filed timely with various funding agencies. Recommendation: We recommend that the County implement a system of internal controls to monitor federal program reporting requirements to ensure compliance. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: The Deputy Finance Director and Chief Financial Officer at the Upstate Workforce Board strive to submit the financial status reports in a timely manner each month. Currently, monthly financial status reports are submitted to SC DEW by the reporting deadline. Each month, the Deputy Finance Director works with the Chief Financial Officer to ensure reports are reviewed and submitted by the reporting deadline. The Deputy Finance Director emails electronic copies of the financial status reports to SC DEW and copies the Chief Financial Officer on those emails. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: December 17, 2019 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Director of Budget and Finance
Spartanburg County, South Carolina respectively submits the following corrective action plan for the year ended June 30, 2019: Name and address of independent public accounting firm: McAbee, Schwartz, Halliday & Co. 824 East Main Street Spartanburg, SC 29302 Audit Period: June 30, 2019 The findings from the June 30, 2019 schedule of findings and questioned costs are discussed below. The findings are numbered consistently with the numbers assigned in the schedule. Section III: Federal Awards Findings Finding 2019-002: U.S. Department of Labor passed through S.C. Department of Employment and Workforce WIOA Cluster CFDA Number: 17.258, 17.259, 17.278 Grant Award Number: Multiple Awards Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of finding: Compliance (Other Matters) Criteria: SC DEW (SC Department of Employment and Workforce) requires monthly Financial Status Reports to be submitted by the 20th of the month following the expenditures for each grant. Condition: Required reports have not been submitted to SC DEW on a timely basis Questioned Costs: None Context: For the year ended June 30, 2019, 2 out of 12 monthly financial reports were not submitted to SC DEW by the 20th day of the month. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to timely file required reports to funding agencies could result in the suspension of its funding. Cause: County does not have a tracking system to ensure required reports are filed timely with various funding agencies Recommendation: We recommend that the County implement a system of internal controls to monitor federal program reporting requirements to ensure compliance. Responsible Official's Response and Corrective Action: The Deputy Finance Director and Chief Financial Officer at the Upstate Workforce Board strive to submit the financial status reports in a timely manner each month. Currently, monthly financial status reports are submitted to SC DEW by the reporting deadline. Each month, the Deputy Finance Director works with the Chief Financial Officer to ensure reports are reviewed and submitted by the reporting deadline. The Deputy Finance Director emails electronic copies of the financial status reports to SC DEW and copies the Chief Financial Officer on those emails. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: December 17, 2019 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Director of Budget and Finance
Required reports have not been submitted to DAODAS on a timely basis. Questioned Costs: None Context: For the year ended June 30, 2019, 3 out of 12 monthly financial reports were not submitted to DAODAS by the 20th day of the month. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to timely file required reports to funding agencies could result in the suspension of its funding. Cause: The Forrester Center (a former department of Spartanburg County) does not have a tracking system to ensure required reports are filed timely with various funding agencies. Repeat Finding: Repeat finding of 2018-002. Recommendation: We recommend that The Forrester Center implement a system of internal controls to monitor federal program reporting requirements to ensure compliance. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: No formal extension request was found for the three financial reports not submitted timely. As of March 1, 2019, The Forrester Center for Behavioral Health is no longer a Spartanburg County department. Going forward, The Forrester Center has implemented a process to review and discuss all DAODAS Deliverables in the weekly Continuous Improvement Committee Meetings. The Administrative Assistant to our CEO will be responsible for bringing the Deliverables list to each weekly meeting and will continuously monitor the submission dates as well as requesting extension deadlines if necessary. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: December 17, 2019 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: CEO, The Forrester Center for Behavioral Health
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Department of Health and Human Services, substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and passed through SC Department of Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Services DAODAS Block Grant CFDA Number: 93.959 Grant Award Number: SPA-BG-19 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Compliance (Other Matters) Criteria: DAODAS requires monthly financial reports to be submitted by the 20th day of each month. Condition: Required reports have not been submitted to DAODAS on a timely basis. Questioned Costs: None Context: For the year ended June 30, 2019, 3 out of 12 monthly financial reports were not submitted to DAODAS by the 20th day of the month. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to timely file required reports to funding agencies could result in the suspension of its funding. Cause: The Forrester Center (a former department of Spartanburg County) does not have a tracking system to ensure required reports are filed timely with various funding agencies. Repeat Finding: Repeat finding of 2018-002. Recommendation: We recommend that The Forrester Center implement a system of internal controls to monitor federal program reporting requirements to ensure compliance. Responsible Official?s Response and Corrective Action: No formal extension request was found for the three financial reports not submitted timely. As of March 1, 2019, The Forrester Center for Behavioral Health is no longer a Spartanburg County department. Going forward, The Forrester Center has implemented a process to review and discuss all DAODAS Deliverables in the weekly Continuous Improvement Committee Meetings. The Administrative Assistant to our CEO will be responsible for bringing the Deliverables list to each weekly meeting and will continuously monitor the submission dates as well as requesting extension deadlines if necessary. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: December 17, 2019 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: CEO, The Forrester Center for Behavioral Health
Spartanburg County, South Carolina respectively submits the following corrective action plan for the year ended June 30, 2019: Name and address of independent public accounting firm: McAbee, Schwartz, Halliday & Co. 824 East Main Street Spartanburg, SC 29302 Audit Period: June 30, 2019 The findings from the June 30, 2019 schedule of findings and questioned costs are discussed below. The findings are numbered consistently with the numbers assigned in the schedule. Section III: Federal Awards Findings Finding 2019-003: Department of Health and Human Services, substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and passed through SC Department of Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Services DAODAS Block Grant CFDA Number: 93.959 Grant Award Number: SPA-BG-19 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Compliance (Other Matters) Criteria: DAODAS requires monthly financial reports to be submitted by the 20th day of each month Condition: Required reports have not been submitted to DAODAS on a timely basis Questioned Costs: None Context: For the year ended June 30, 2019, 3 out of 12 monthly financial reports were not submitted to DAODAS by the 20th day of the month. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to timely file required reports to funding agencies could result in the suspension of its funding. Cause: The Forrester Center (a former department of Spartanburg County) does not have a tracking system to ensure required reports are filed timely with various funding agencies. Repeat Finding: Repeat finding of 2018-002 Recommendation: We recommend that the Forrester Center implement a system of internal controls to monitor federal program reporting requirements to ensure compliance. Responsible Official's Response and Corrective Action: No formal extension request was found for the three financial reports not submitted timely. As of March 1, 2019, The Forrester enter for Behavioral Health is no longer a Spartanburg County department. Going forward, The Forrester Center has implemented a process to review and discuss all DAODAS Deliverables in the weekly Continuous Improvement Committee Meetings. The Administrative Assistant to our CEO will be responsible for bringing the Deliverables list to each weekly meeting and will continuously monitor the submission dates as well as requesting extension deadline if necessary. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action: December 17, 2019 Person Responsible for Corrective Action: CEO, The Forrester Center for Behavioral Health
2018-002
FAC accepted this audit on February 17, 2019 — management decision was due August 17, 2019.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴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.
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →Monitor subrecipient audit findings and compliance status.
Start monitoring →© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.