EIN: 592470479
UEI: C1X1NCTRB848
Audited by: CliftonLarsonAllen LLP
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 May 15, 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 November 15, 2026 (71 days from today).
What is a management decision? →During testing, the Organization did not maintain adequate internal controls to ensure compliance with cost‑sharing and level‑of‑effort requirements under the Homeless Challenge Grant. Specifically, costs reported as cash matching funds included amounts paid with other federal funds, required level‑of‑effort documentation was incomplete or not reviewed, and the Organization did not meet all required service and effort benchmarks during the grant period. Questioned costs: $24,473 of the $43,664 expenses reported to the grantor were unallowable as determined by the financial reports received. Context: Audit testing identified multiple compliance failures related to cost sharing and level‑of‑effort requirements. Of the expenses reported as cash matching funds, $24,473 were paid using other federal funds. Additionally, documentation supporting required level‑of‑effort measures was incomplete, and 3 of 6 required effort benchmarks were not met during the grant period. Cause: The Organization lacked sufficient review controls and monitoring procedures to ensure that cost‑sharing expenditures were allowable, level‑of‑effort documentation was complete, and required program benchmarks were achieved. Effect: Failure to comply with cost‑sharing and level‑of‑effort requirements could, at the grantor’s discretion, jeopardize current or future funding and result in disallowed costs. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal review controls to ensure that cost‑sharing expenditures are allowable, level‑of‑effort requirements are fully documented and reviewed, and program benchmarks are monitored throughout the grant period to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Cost Sharing and Level of Effort Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Homeless Challenge Grant Assistance Listing Number: 93.558 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: IP004 - 2025 Pass-Through Agency: Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Award Period: July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025 Type of Finding: • Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance • Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria: Cash amounts reported as cost sharing may not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federally financed program. In addition, recipients are required to document and meet all level‑of‑effort requirements and maintain documentation demonstrating compliance with program service requirements as specified in the grant agreement. Condition: During testing, the Organization did not maintain adequate internal controls to ensure compliance with cost‑sharing and level‑of‑effort requirements under the Homeless Challenge Grant. Specifically, costs reported as cash matching funds included amounts paid with other federal funds, required level‑of‑effort documentation was incomplete or not reviewed, and the Organization did not meet all required service and effort benchmarks during the grant period. Questioned costs: $24,473 of the $43,664 expenses reported to the grantor were unallowable as determined by the financial reports received. Context: Audit testing identified multiple compliance failures related to cost sharing and level‑of‑effort requirements. Of the expenses reported as cash matching funds, $24,473 were paid using other federal funds. Additionally, documentation supporting required level‑of‑effort measures was incomplete, and 3 of 6 required effort benchmarks were not met during the grant period. Cause: The Organization lacked sufficient review controls and monitoring procedures to ensure that cost‑sharing expenditures were allowable, level‑of‑effort documentation was complete, and required program benchmarks were achieved. Effect: Failure to comply with cost‑sharing and level‑of‑effort requirements could, at the grantor’s discretion, jeopardize current or future funding and result in disallowed costs. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal review controls to ensure that cost‑sharing expenditures are allowable, level‑of‑effort requirements are fully documented and reviewed, and program benchmarks are monitored throughout the grant period to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Assistance Listing No. 93.558 Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal review controls to ensure that cost-sharing expenditures are allowable, level-of-effort requirements are fully documented and reviewed, and program benchmarks are monitored throughout the grant period to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Palm Beach is strengthening its grant compliance procedures for the Homeless Challenge Grant. Management is implementing formal processes to separately track allowable match sources, verify that proposed cost-sharing expenditures are non-federal and otherwise allowable prior to inclusion in grant reporting, and maintain supporting documentation for all level-of-effort calculations and compliance measures. In addition, management will conduct periodic grant compliance meetings between program and finance personnel to review benchmark attainment, cost-sharing requirements, and reporting obligations. Program leadership will certify compliance with applicable benchmarks and level-of-effort requirements prior to submission of related grant reports. These measures are intended to improve grant compliance oversight and reduce the risk of future noncompliance. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Carol Rodriguez, Program Development & Quality Director; Marc Hopin, Finance Director; and Rocio Lopez, Program Director Planned completion date for corrective action plan: June 30, 2026
During our testing, we noted that the Organization did not have adequate internal controls to ensure eligibility intake forms were reviewed by an individual other than the preparer. Questioned costs: None. Context: Of the eight eligibility intake forms selected for testing, four were not reviewed by an individual other than the preparer. The review of intake forms is the sole key control over participant eligibility for this program. Cause: The Organization lacked a review process requiring eligibility determinations to be reviewed by someone independent of the preparer. Effect: Without an independent review of eligibility determinations, the Organization could allow ineligible participants into the program, resulting in noncompliance with grant requirements and potential disallowed costs. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Eligibility intake forms should be reviewed by an individual other than the preparer to ensure that only eligible participants are served under the Homeless Challenge Grant. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Eligibility Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Homeless Challenge Grant Assistance Listing Number: 93.558 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: IP004 - 2025 Pass-Through Agency: Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Award Period: July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025 Type of Finding: • Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: Eligibility determinations must be reviewed by an individual other than the preparer to ensure that only eligible participants are served in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization did not have adequate internal controls to ensure eligibility intake forms were reviewed by an individual other than the preparer. Questioned costs: None. Context: Of the eight eligibility intake forms selected for testing, four were not reviewed by an individual other than the preparer. The review of intake forms is the sole key control over participant eligibility for this program. Cause: The Organization lacked a review process requiring eligibility determinations to be reviewed by someone independent of the preparer. Effect: Without an independent review of eligibility determinations, the Organization could allow ineligible participants into the program, resulting in noncompliance with grant requirements and potential disallowed costs. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Eligibility intake forms should be reviewed by an individual other than the preparer to ensure that only eligible participants are served under the Homeless Challenge Grant. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Assistance Listing No. 93.558 Recommendation: Eligibility intake forms should be reviewed by an individual other than the preparer to ensure that only eligible participants are served under the Homeless Challenge Grant. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Palm Beach is strengthening eligibility determination controls for the Homeless Challenge Grant by implementing a formal secondary review process for participant intake and eligibility documentation. All eligibility determinations will be reviewed by qualified personnel independent of the preparer prior to final approval to confirm compliance with grant eligibility requirements and completeness of supporting documentation. Management will also maintain documentation evidencing the completion of the secondary review. These procedures are intended to strengthen compliance with grant requirements and reduce the risk of ineligible participants being served. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Carol Rodriguez, Program Development & Quality Director; and Rocio Lopez, Program Director Planned completion date for corrective action plan: June 30, 2026
During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate documentation to support the total amount of payroll expenses requested for reimbursement under the Homeless Challenge Grant. Questioned costs: $30,730 of the $60,782 payroll expenses requested for reimbursement could not be substantiated with supporting documentation. Context: The grant allows payroll expenses to be allocated evenly throughout the grant period. However, the Organization was unable to provide supporting documentation for $30,730 of the $60,782 requested for reimbursement for payroll costs during the audit period. Cause: The Organization lacked adequate documentation and review controls to ensure payroll expenses charged to the grant were fully supported and properly substantiated. Effect: Without adequate documentation, payroll costs may be requested for reimbursement that were not actually incurred or are otherwise unallowable, which could result in disallowed costs and jeopardize current or future funding. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Management should ensure that all payroll costs charged to the program are supported by adequate documentation demonstrating that the costs were incurred and allocable to the Homeless Challenge Grant. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Allowable Costs Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Homeless Challenge Grant Assistance Listing Number: 93.558 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: IP004 - 2025 Pass-Through Agency: Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Award Period: July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025 Type of Finding: • Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance • Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria: Payroll and other costs charged to a federal award must be supported by adequate documentation demonstrating that the costs were incurred, are allowable, and are allocable to the program in accordance with the terms of the grant agreement and federal cost principles. Condition: During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate documentation to support the total amount of payroll expenses requested for reimbursement under the Homeless Challenge Grant. Questioned costs: $30,730 of the $60,782 payroll expenses requested for reimbursement could not be substantiated with supporting documentation. Context: The grant allows payroll expenses to be allocated evenly throughout the grant period. However, the Organization was unable to provide supporting documentation for $30,730 of the $60,782 requested for reimbursement for payroll costs during the audit period. Cause: The Organization lacked adequate documentation and review controls to ensure payroll expenses charged to the grant were fully supported and properly substantiated. Effect: Without adequate documentation, payroll costs may be requested for reimbursement that were not actually incurred or are otherwise unallowable, which could result in disallowed costs and jeopardize current or future funding. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Management should ensure that all payroll costs charged to the program are supported by adequate documentation demonstrating that the costs were incurred and allocable to the Homeless Challenge Grant. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Assistance Listing No. 93.558 Recommendation: Management should ensure that all payroll costs charged to the program are supported by adequate documentation demonstrating that the costs were incurred and allocable to the Homeless Challenge Grant. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Palm Beach is strengthening payroll allocation controls for the Homeless Challenge Grant by implementing enhanced documentation and review procedures for payroll costs charged to the program. Management will require supporting documentation sufficient to demonstrate that payroll costs charged to the grant were incurred, allocable, and properly supported in accordance with grant requirements. This process will include supervisory review of payroll allocations, reconciliation of payroll charges to supporting records, and periodic assessment of payroll allocations to confirm continued appropriateness. Adjustments will be made as necessary to maintain accurate grant reporting and cost allocation. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Carol Rodriguez, Program Development & Quality Director; Marc Hopin, Finance Director; and Rocio Lopez, Program Director Planned completion date for corrective action plan: June 30, 2026
During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate internal controls to ensure compliance with eligibility and procurement requirements. Specifically, eligibility assessments were not reviewed by an individual other than the preparer, and the Organization’s procurement policy did not address procurement requirements for vendors other than construction, as required by Uniform Guidance. Questioned costs: None Context: All nine eligibility assessments selected for testing were not reviewed by an individual other than the preparer. The review of eligibility assessments is the sole key control over participant eligibility for this program and is therefore pervasive. Additionally, while the Organization maintains a procurement policy for construction vendors, the policy does not address procurement requirements applicable to other vendor types, increasing the risk of noncompliant purchasing practices. Cause: The Organization lacked sufficient review procedures over eligibility determinations and did not maintain comprehensive procurement policies that address all Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Effect: Without independent review of eligibility determinations, the Organization could allow ineligible participants into the program. Inadequate procurement policies increase the risk that purchases are made inconsistently or in noncompliance with federal requirements, potentially resulting in disallowed costs or questioned expenditures. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Management should implement a review process requiring eligibility assessments to be reviewed by an individual other than the preparer and update procurement policies to fully comply with Uniform Guidance requirements, including procedures for procurements exceeding the micro‑purchase threshold. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Eligibility and Procurement Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Justice Federal Program Name: Services for Trafficking Victims Assistance Listing Number: 16.320 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 15POVC‑23‑GK‑02725‑HT; 15POVC‑24‑GG‑01548‑HT Pass-Through Agency: Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Award Period: October 1, 2023 – September 30, 2026; October 1, 2024 – September 30, 2027 Type of Finding: • Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: Eligibility determinations must be reviewed by an individual other than the preparer to ensure only eligible participants are served. In addition, recipients are required to maintain written procurement policies and procedures that comply with Uniform Guidance requirements, including procedures for procurements exceeding the micro‑purchase threshold. Condition: During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate internal controls to ensure compliance with eligibility and procurement requirements. Specifically, eligibility assessments were not reviewed by an individual other than the preparer, and the Organization’s procurement policy did not address procurement requirements for vendors other than construction, as required by Uniform Guidance. Questioned costs: None Context: All nine eligibility assessments selected for testing were not reviewed by an individual other than the preparer. The review of eligibility assessments is the sole key control over participant eligibility for this program and is therefore pervasive. Additionally, while the Organization maintains a procurement policy for construction vendors, the policy does not address procurement requirements applicable to other vendor types, increasing the risk of noncompliant purchasing practices. Cause: The Organization lacked sufficient review procedures over eligibility determinations and did not maintain comprehensive procurement policies that address all Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Effect: Without independent review of eligibility determinations, the Organization could allow ineligible participants into the program. Inadequate procurement policies increase the risk that purchases are made inconsistently or in noncompliance with federal requirements, potentially resulting in disallowed costs or questioned expenditures. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Management should implement a review process requiring eligibility assessments to be reviewed by an individual other than the preparer and update procurement policies to fully comply with Uniform Guidance requirements, including procedures for procurements exceeding the micro‑purchase threshold. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
U.S. Department of Justice Assistance Listing-No. 16.320 Recommendation: Management should implement a review process requiring eligibility assessments to be reviewed by an individual other than the preparer and update procurement policies to fully comply with Uniform Guidance requirements, including procedures for procurements exceeding the micro purchase threshold. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Palm Beach is strengthening compliance procedures for the U.S. Department of Justice program by implementing a formal secondary review process for participant eligibility determinations and by updating procurement policies and procedures to align with Uniform Guidance requirements. All eligibility determinations will be reviewed by qualified personnel independent of the preparer prior to final approval to confirm compliance with grant eligibility requirements and completeness of supporting documentation. In addition, management will revise procurement policies and related procedures to address procurements exceeding the micro-purchase threshold and to clarify documentation and approval requirements for applicable purchases. These actions are intended to improve compliance with grant eligibility and procurement requirements. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Carol Rodriguez, Program Development & Quality Director; and Marc Hopin, Finance Director Planned completion date for corrective action plan: June 30, 2026
During our testing, we noted the Organization requested reimbursement for costs that were incurred outside the approved grant period. Questioned costs: $168.34 was calculated as unallowable after calculating the portion of the invoice attributable to dates outside the award period. Context: Of the 5 expenses selected for testing related to reimbursement requests during the first month of the grant period, 3 were partially incurred prior to the beginning of the grant period. Cause: The Organization lacked sufficient review procedures to ensure that expenses submitted for reimbursement were incurred within the approved grant period. Effect: Without adequate controls over period‑of‑performance requirements, the Organization could request reimbursement for unallowable costs, resulting in disallowed expenditures and potential repayment to the grantor. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Management should implement review procedures to ensure that all expenses submitted for reimbursement are incurred within the approved grant period prior to submission. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Period of Performance Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Justice Federal Program Name: Services for Trafficking Victims Assistance Listing Number: 16.320 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 15POVC‑24‑GG‑01548‑HT Pass-Through Agency: Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Award Period: October 1, 2024 – September 30, 2027 Type of Finding: • Significant deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: Expenses requested for reimbursement must be incurred during the approved grant period in accordance with the terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: During our testing, we noted the Organization requested reimbursement for costs that were incurred outside the approved grant period. Questioned costs: $168.34 was calculated as unallowable after calculating the portion of the invoice attributable to dates outside the award period. Context: Of the 5 expenses selected for testing related to reimbursement requests during the first month of the grant period, 3 were partially incurred prior to the beginning of the grant period. Cause: The Organization lacked sufficient review procedures to ensure that expenses submitted for reimbursement were incurred within the approved grant period. Effect: Without adequate controls over period‑of‑performance requirements, the Organization could request reimbursement for unallowable costs, resulting in disallowed expenditures and potential repayment to the grantor. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: Management should implement review procedures to ensure that all expenses submitted for reimbursement are incurred within the approved grant period prior to submission. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
U.S. Department of Justice Assistance Listing-No. 16.320 Recommendation: Management should implement review procedures to ensure that all expenses submitted for reimbursement are incurred within the approved grant period prior to submission. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Palm Beach is strengthening reimbursement review controls for the U.S. Department of Justice program by implementing review procedures to verify that all expenses submitted for reimbursement were incurred within the approved grant period. Prior to submission of reimbursement requests, finance personnel will review invoices and service dates supporting each expenditure to confirm allowability within the grant period. In addition, reimbursement packages will require documented review and approval by both finance and program personnel prior to submission. These procedures are intended to improve compliance with grant period requirements and reduce the risk of ineligible costs being submitted for reimbursement. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Carol Rodriguez, Program Development & Quality Director; Marc Hopin, Finance Director; and Sandra Perez, Program Director Planned completion date for corrective action plan: June 30, 2026
FAC accepted this audit on March 25, 2025 — management decision was due September 25, 2025.
CLA reviewed 5 of 12 months' worth of reimbursement requests and noted that the match reported on the February 2024 reimbursement request was not calculated correctly. The individual employee matches were calculated correctly, but during preparation of the reimbursement request, the wrong number was brought into the reimbursement request due to what appears to be human error. Match reported for February 2024 was $5,685.40, but actual match should have been $1,385.56. This resulted in an overstatement of the match by $4,300.84. Since the match portion is not reimbursed to CCDPB, questioned costs are zero. Questioned costs: None Context: The sample of five reimbursement requests included reimbursement requests from different periods during the grant, inside the fiscal year. Cause: The inaccurate completion of the reimbursement requests. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: No disagreement.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Federal Agency: Department of Justice Program Title: Department of Justice Housing Assistance Listing Number: 16.320 Award Period: October 1, 2023 - September 30, 2026 • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance • Other Matters Criteria: 2 CRF 200.305(b)(3) states the Organization only request reimbursement for costs which are paid prior to the date of the reimbursement request. Condition: CLA reviewed 5 of 12 months' worth of reimbursement requests and noted that the match reported on the February 2024 reimbursement request was not calculated correctly. The individual employee matches were calculated correctly, but during preparation of the reimbursement request, the wrong number was brought into the reimbursement request due to what appears to be human error. Match reported for February 2024 was $5,685.40, but actual match should have been $1,385.56. This resulted in an overstatement of the match by $4,300.84. Since the match portion is not reimbursed to CCDPB, questioned costs are zero. Questioned costs: None Context: The sample of five reimbursement requests included reimbursement requests from different periods during the grant, inside the fiscal year. Cause: The inaccurate completion of the reimbursement requests. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: No disagreement.
Department of Justice Housing - Assistance Listing No. 16.320 Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: All reimbursement requests will follow a process of review with back-up documentation prior to submission for all reimbursable grants. Contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Joseph Padilla Planned completion date for corrective action plan: 3/1/2025
FAC accepted this audit on November 17, 2023 — management decision was due May 17, 2024.
In a sample of 25 transactions tested, there was one instance where the time sheet hours for the time spent on the grant did not match the hours charged to the grant per the reimbursement request. There was 3 instances where there was a difference in the approved pay rate utilized in the reimbursement request versus the payroll register. The total amount mischarged $218.20 to the grant. Questioned costs: $218.20. Context: The sample of 25 transactions included transactions from different periods during the grant, inside the fiscal year. Cause: The inaccurate recording of the reimbursement requests is a result from input mistake. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: No disagreement.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023 – 002-Allowable Costs Federal Agency: Department of Justice Program Title: Department of Justice Housing Assistance Listing Number: 16.320 Award Period: May 1, 2020 – April 30, 2023 • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance • Other Matters Criteria: 2 CRF 200.431 states cost of compensation are allowable to the extent that they satisfy the specific requirements of these items: (1) is reasonable for the services rendered and conforms to the established written policy of the non-Federal entity consistently applied to both Federal and non-Federal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a non-Federal entity’s laws and/or rules or written policies and meets the requirements of Federal statute, where applicable; and (3) is determined and supported as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses, when applicable. Condition: In a sample of 25 transactions tested, there was one instance where the time sheet hours for the time spent on the grant did not match the hours charged to the grant per the reimbursement request. There was 3 instances where there was a difference in the approved pay rate utilized in the reimbursement request versus the payroll register. The total amount mischarged $218.20 to the grant. Questioned costs: $218.20. Context: The sample of 25 transactions included transactions from different periods during the grant, inside the fiscal year. Cause: The inaccurate recording of the reimbursement requests is a result from input mistake. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: No disagreement.
2023-002 Department of Justice Housing – Assistance Listing No. 16.320 Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: A second staff person has completed the Department of Justice Grants Financial Management Training and is now qualified to work on the federal grants. This will allow the agency to have someone other than that the person creating the reimbursement material to request the reimbursement. This adds an additional layer of control over the amount requested for reimbursement. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Peter Hermann Planned completion date for corrective action plan: November 6, 2023
In a sample of 24 transactions tested, there was one instance where the reimbursement request did not agree to the supporting documentation. The reimbursement was for $23,031.67 and the supporting documentation was for $19,852.76. The reimbursement request incorrectly included a match amount. Questioned costs: $3,178.91 Context: The sample of 24 transactions included transactions from different periods during the grant, inside the fiscal year. Cause: The inaccurate completion of the reimbursement requests. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: No disagreement.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023 – 003 - Cash Management Federal Agency: Department of Justice Program Title: Department of Justice Housing Assistance Listing Number: 16.320 Award Period: May 1, 2020 – April 30,2023 • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance • Other Matters Criteria: 2 CRF 200.305(b)(3) states the Organization only request reimbursement for costs which are paid prior to the date of the reimbursement request. Condition: In a sample of 24 transactions tested, there was one instance where the reimbursement request did not agree to the supporting documentation. The reimbursement was for $23,031.67 and the supporting documentation was for $19,852.76. The reimbursement request incorrectly included a match amount. Questioned costs: $3,178.91 Context: The sample of 24 transactions included transactions from different periods during the grant, inside the fiscal year. Cause: The inaccurate completion of the reimbursement requests. Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: No disagreement.
Department of Justice Housing – Assistance Listing No. 16.320 Recommendation: We recommend reimbursement requests be reviewed and traced back to supporting documentation prior to the filing of the reimbursement request. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: A second staff person has completed the Department of Justice Grants Financial Management Training and is now qualified to work on the federal grants. This will allow the agency to have one finance person creating the reimbursement calculations and a second finance person reconciling the calculations. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Peter Hermann.
FAC accepted this audit on October 24, 2022 — management decision was due April 24, 2023.
FAC accepted this audit on November 1, 2021 — management decision was due May 1, 2022.
FAC accepted this audit on November 1, 2020 — management decision was due May 1, 2021.
In a sample of 19 payroll disbursements tested, there were 6 transactions in which the time sheet hours for time spent on the grant did not match the hours charged to the grant per the payroll register and reimbursement request. The 6 errors consisted of 5 which over-charged the grant (time sheets had fewer actual hours than reflected on the payroll register) for a total of $1,366 and 1 which under charged the grant for $27 for a net over-charging of $1,339. Questioned costs: None noted. Context: The sample of 19 payroll transactions included transactions from different periods during the grant, inside the fiscal year. The errors were noted to be concentrated in the months of February 2020 and May 2020. Cause: The Diocese of Palm Beach was forced to make a very rapid change of payroll processing companies. With the previous company CCDPB was able to easily and accurately allocate the salary costs of employees (particularly salaried employees) over several different programs. However, with the new system CCDPB encountered issues early on in allocating the salary cost of salaries employees. CCDPB was providing the correct information to the Payroll department but the system was changing back to default allocations. Once the issue was discovered, CCDPB and the Payroll Department were able to find a process to ensure the allocations were being recorded properly through the payroll system. Effect: The effect of the finding was an over-charging of expenditures to the grant. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that time sheet support is reviewed against the payroll register to ensure hours worked towards particular grants agrees to actual hours charged to that grant. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2020 ? 001-Allowable Costs-Payroll Disbursements Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Program Title: Refugee and Entrant Assistance Voluntary Agency Programs CFDA Number: 93.567 Award Period: October 1, 2018-September 30, 2019 and October 1, 2019-September 30, 2020 Type of Finding:? Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance ? Other Matters Criteria: 2 CRF 200.431 states costs of compensation are allowable to the extent that they satisfy the specific requirements of these items: (1) Is reasonable for the services rendered and conforms to the established written policy of the non-Federal entity consistently applied to both Federal and non-Federal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a non-Federal entity's laws and/or rules or written policies and meets the requirements of Federal statute, where applicable; and (3) Is determined and supported as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses, when applicable. Condition: In a sample of 19 payroll disbursements tested, there were 6 transactions in which the time sheet hours for time spent on the grant did not match the hours charged to the grant per the payroll register and reimbursement request. The 6 errors consisted of 5 which over-charged the grant (time sheets had fewer actual hours than reflected on the payroll register) for a total of $1,366 and 1 which under charged the grant for $27 for a net over-charging of $1,339. Questioned costs: None noted. Context: The sample of 19 payroll transactions included transactions from different periods during the grant, inside the fiscal year. The errors were noted to be concentrated in the months of February 2020 and May 2020. Cause: The Diocese of Palm Beach was forced to make a very rapid change of payroll processing companies. With the previous company CCDPB was able to easily and accurately allocate the salary costs of employees (particularly salaried employees) over several different programs. However, with the new system CCDPB encountered issues early on in allocating the salary cost of salaries employees. CCDPB was providing the correct information to the Payroll department but the system was changing back to default allocations. Once the issue was discovered, CCDPB and the Payroll Department were able to find a process to ensure the allocations were being recorded properly through the payroll system. Effect: The effect of the finding was an over-charging of expenditures to the grant. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that time sheet support is reviewed against the payroll register to ensure hours worked towards particular grants agrees to actual hours charged to that grant. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs.
Refugee and Entrant Assistance Voluntary Agency Programs ? CFDA No. 93.567 Recommendation: We recommend that time sheet support is reviewed against the payroll register to ensure hours worked towards particular grants agrees to actual hours charged to that grant. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action planned in response to finding: The accounting/payroll staff will establish a process to review and ensure the number of hours on the individual time sheets are accurately reported on the Grant expense reports are correct. The Finance Director and/or Staff Accountant will create the Match Grant monthly reimbursement request. Once request is completed it will be sent to the Program Director, with all back up documentation, for review. This will ensure that at least two Agency individuals has reviewed the reimbursement request prior to submission. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Peter Herrmann
There was no formal review over cash reimbursement requests for the first few months of the fiscal year. A review process was implemented for October 2019 and beyond. Questioned costs: None noted. Context: Out of the 5 reimbursement requests tested, there were 2 which did not have a formal review. The new review process was properly implemented in October 2019. Cause: There was no formal process in place for review over reimbursement requests until October 2019. Effect: Lack of review over reimbursement requests increases risk of error or fraud. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: We recommend that CCDPB maintain their newly implemented review process for reimbursement requests. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2020 ? 002-Cash Management Federal Agency: Department of Homeland Security Program Title: Disaster Case Manager Programs CFDA Number: 97.088 Award Period: May 31, 2018-December 31, 2019 Type of Finding: ? Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: CCDPB is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to ensure the compliance requirements of grants are being met. Cash reimbursement requests should be reviewed before they are submitted to granting agency. Condition: There was no formal review over cash reimbursement requests for the first few months of the fiscal year. A review process was implemented for October 2019 and beyond. Questioned costs: None noted. Context: Out of the 5 reimbursement requests tested, there were 2 which did not have a formal review. The new review process was properly implemented in October 2019. Cause: There was no formal process in place for review over reimbursement requests until October 2019. Effect: Lack of review over reimbursement requests increases risk of error or fraud. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: We recommend that CCDPB maintain their newly implemented review process for reimbursement requests. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs.
Disaster Case Manager Program ? CFDA No. 97.088 Recommendation: The organization should consider implementing a formal process of review over requests submitted for reimbursement. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action planned in response to finding: The Finance Manager is training the Staff Accountant to prepare the reimbursement requests and then have the Finance Manager review the documentation prior to submission. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Peter Herrmann
2019-002
FAC accepted this audit on October 29, 2019 — management decision was due April 29, 2020.
There was no formal review process in place over cash reimbursement requests submitted. Criteria: The Organization?s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to ensure that compliance requirements of grants are being met. Context: Audit procedures surrounding internal control testing over reimbursement requests made identified that there was no formal review process in place. Effect: The risks of error or fraud increases when there is no formal review process in place. Cause: The Disaster Assistance Grant was new for the current year and formal processes were not yet in place. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that a system of procedure of review over reimbursement requests is implemented. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Federal Agency: Department of Homeland Security Program Title: Disaster Case Manager Programs CFDA Number: 97.088 Award Period: May 31, 2018 through September 30, 2019 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Condition: There was no formal review process in place over cash reimbursement requests submitted. Criteria: The Organization?s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to ensure that compliance requirements of grants are being met. Context: Audit procedures surrounding internal control testing over reimbursement requests made identified that there was no formal review process in place. Effect: The risks of error or fraud increases when there is no formal review process in place. Cause: The Disaster Assistance Grant was new for the current year and formal processes were not yet in place. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that a system of procedure of review over reimbursement requests is implemented. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs.
Recommendation: We recommend that a system of procedure of review over reimbursement requests is implemented. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs.
FAC accepted this audit on December 7, 2017 — management decision was due June 7, 2018.
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.
Browse other Single Audit organizations in Florida →
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.
