Union County Fiscal Court

The Union County Fiscal Court Did Not Have Adequate Controls Over Disbursements Of Economic Adjustment Assistance (EDA) Funds Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number #11.307 Economic Adjustment Assistance Award Number and Year: 2024 Name of Federal Agency: US Department of Commerce Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed; Allowable Cost Type of Finding: Material Weakness Amount of Questioned Costs: None Opinion Modification: None COVID-19 Related: No The Union County Fiscal Court failed to implement internal controls over federal expenditures of Economic Adjustment Assistance Funds. During our testing, it was noted that purchase orders were not properly utilized. All five expenditures, totaling $3,000,000 had purchase orders issued after the expense had already been incurred. According to staff, purchase orders are issued by the department heads and are typically dated when the invoices are received. A lack of controls over disbursements could result in inaccurate financial reporting, misappropriation of assets, cash flow problems, and claims being paid that are not valid obligations of the fiscal court. KRS 68.210 gives the State Local Finance Officer the authority to prescribe a system of uniform accounts. The Department for Local Government’s (DLG) County Budget Preparation and State Local Finance Officer Policy Manual outlines requirements for counties’ handling of public funds, including required purchasing procedures for counties. According to a memorandum from the Department for Local Government (DLG) dated August 4, 2016, “[t]he main purpose of this system is to ensure that purchases can be made if there are sufficient appropriations available within the amount of line items in the county’s budget. Because of this, it is a requirement by the State Local Finance Officer that all counties have a purchase order system and follow the guidelines prescribed on Page 54 of the County Budget Preparation and State Local Finance Officer Policy Manual.” Furthermore, DLG highly recommends that counties accept the practice of issuing purchase orders for payroll and utility claims. Lastly, KRS 46.010(2) requires, “each county treasurer, and each county officer who receives or disburses state funds, to keep an accurate account of receipts and disbursements, showing a daily balance of receipts and disbursements.” KRS 46.010(3) requires, “all county officers handling state funds, other than taxes, to make an annual report to the Department for Local Government showing receipts and disbursements, and to make other financial statements as the Department for Local Government requires.” The retention and review of adequate supporting documentation for all disbursements, as well as an effective purchase order system, are basic internal controls necessary to ensure the accuracy and reliability of financial reports. Moreover, implementation of strong internal controls over disbursements, is necessary to prevent misappropriation of assets, cash flow problems, and claims being paid that are not valid obligations of the fiscal court. We recommend the Union County Fiscal Court strengthen internal controls over disbursements by ensuring proper documentation is maintained for all disbursements to properly support claims and ensuring purchase orders are issued prior to all purchases being made.

Prepared by: Lissa Gibson, Union County Treasurer Date Prepared: 6-20-2025 Person Responsible for Corrective Action Plan: Jill Hunley or Kim Nance Anticipated Completion Date: Already jmplemented Official's Response: This is a rollover comment from FY 22 and 23 regarding expenditures in general. If purchase orders are not issued on the day of purchase they were dated the date the invoices were received. This has been corrected to match the date of invoice.