← Back to home

Town of Golden MeadowLocal Government

EIN: 720882290

UEI: FZCQS3EQHRN1

Audited by: Bourgeois Bennett, LLC

Oversight agency: 14 [Department of Housing and Urban Development]

View federal awards & risk assessment →

Data as of September 2, 2026

Town of Golden Meadow7 audit years1 findings
7
Audit Years
1
Total Findings
0
Repeat Findings
$860.5K
Federal Awards Expended (FY 2024)

FY 2024-12-31

$860,503 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization

The FAC accepted this audit on May 13, 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 November 13, 2025 (294 days ago).

What is a management decision? →

FY 2023-12-31

$903,855 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on April 24, 2024 — management decision was due October 24, 2024.

FY 2020-12-31

$910,463 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on June 13, 2021 — management decision was due December 13, 2021.

FY 2019-12-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$956,175 federal awards expended

FAC accepted this audit on May 13, 2020 — management decision was due November 13, 2020.

2019-001
Procurement & Suspension/Debarment
MATERIAL WEAKNESS

Executive Order 12549, 24CFR 85.35. 2 CFR 200.212 and Section 6, Part 14.0 of the OCD-DRUCDBG-DR Grant Administrative Manual, calls for a contractor's status to be reviewed prior to a contract being awarded to ensure that the contractor is not debarred, suspended or otherwise excluded from - or ineligible - for participation in federal assistance programs. It was noted in an MIP Monitor's Review conducted in May 2019 that the Town entered an administrative services contract with the South Central Planning and Development Commission in August 2010. The contract file did not include sufficient evidence of a contractor clearance being performed prior to the awarding of the contract. Context: This appears to be an isolated incidence limited to the service contract. Cause: The Town did not have policies and procedures in place for adhering to federal regulations relating to service contracts.Effect: Without performing contractor clearance the Town cannot be reasonably assured it is not engaging with a debarred entity. Consequently, any funds paid to a debarred entity are not eligible for reimbursement. Subsequent search for debarment and suspension did not reveal the South Central Planning and Development Commission to be debarred or suspended from participating in federal assistance programs therefore there are no questioned fees paid the South Central Planning and Development Commission over the course of the contract. Recommendation: Policies, procedures and controls surrounding contractor eligibility should be strengthened. For any future federal assistance program requiring an administrative services contract, the Town must take appropriate measures to ensure contractor clearance is performed prior to awarding a contract. Evidence of the clearance procedures performed should be maintained in the contract file. Views of Responsible Officials: The Town agrees with the finding, see Management's Corrective Plan for further descriptions of corrective actions to be taken.

Show full finding ▾
Full finding narrative

Community Development Block Grant, Municipalities Infrastructure Program, CFDA 14.269, Grant No. 29 MIPC 2301, Pass through Louisiana Division of Administration Office of Community Development Criteria and Condition: Executive Order 12549, 24CFR 85.35. 2 CFR 200.212 and Section 6, Part 14.0 of the OCD-DRUCDBG-DR Grant Administrative Manual, calls for a contractor's status to be reviewed prior to a contract being awarded to ensure that the contractor is not debarred, suspended or otherwise excluded from - or ineligible - for participation in federal assistance programs. It was noted in an MIP Monitor's Review conducted in May 2019 that the Town entered an administrative services contract with the South Central Planning and Development Commission in August 2010. The contract file did not include sufficient evidence of a contractor clearance being performed prior to the awarding of the contract. Context: This appears to be an isolated incidence limited to the service contract. Cause: The Town did not have policies and procedures in place for adhering to federal regulations relating to service contracts.Effect: Without performing contractor clearance the Town cannot be reasonably assured it is not engaging with a debarred entity. Consequently, any funds paid to a debarred entity are not eligible for reimbursement. Subsequent search for debarment and suspension did not reveal the South Central Planning and Development Commission to be debarred or suspended from participating in federal assistance programs therefore there are no questioned fees paid the South Central Planning and Development Commission over the course of the contract. Recommendation: Policies, procedures and controls surrounding contractor eligibility should be strengthened. For any future federal assistance program requiring an administrative services contract, the Town must take appropriate measures to ensure contractor clearance is performed prior to awarding a contract. Evidence of the clearance procedures performed should be maintained in the contract file. Views of Responsible Officials: The Town agrees with the finding, see Management's Corrective Plan for further descriptions of corrective actions to be taken.

Corrective Action Plan

Recommendation: Policies, procedures and controls surrounding contractor eligibility should be strengthened. For any future federal assistance program requiring an administrative services contract, the Town must take appropriate measures to ensure contractor clearance is performed prior to awarding a contract. Evidence of the clearance procedures performed should be maintained in the contract file. Corrective Action: The Town was not aware administrative service contractors were required to be checked for debarment and suspension. We have attended many hours of training which led us to believe clearance requirements applied to prime construction contractors. We have checked subcontractors and administrative service contractors clearance on any federally funded projects to ensure compliance.

About Procurement and Suspension and Debarment →

FY 2018-12-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$1,626,093 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on September 23, 2019 — management decision was due March 23, 2020.

FY 2017-12-31

LOW-RISK AUDITEE$763,284 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on August 29, 2018 — management decision was due March 1, 2019.

FY 2016-12-31

$1,161,990 federal awards expendedNo findings recorded this year

FAC accepted this audit on June 11, 2017 — management decision was due December 11, 2017.

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 Louisiana

Are you this organization?

Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.

Start tracking findings →

Do you fund this organization?

Monitor subrecipient audit findings and filing records.

Start monitoring →

Product

Resources

Legal

Single Audit Intelligence is an independent tool powered by Federal Audit Clearinghouse data. Not affiliated with GSA, OMB, or any federal agency.

© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.