EIN: 726000258
UEI: V5V6JQG5MFG8
Audited by: Kolder Slaven
Oversight agency: 21 [Department of the Treasury]
View federal awards & risk assessment →
Data as of August 31, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on June 5, 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 December 5, 2025 (271 days ago).
What is a management decision? →FAC accepted this audit on June 6, 2024 — management decision was due December 6, 2024.
An individual signed a check that was not an approved signer. Cause: There were inadequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that the City updated the Financial Management Questionnaire as required by the grant program. Effect: The City did not comply with the grant agreement regarding financial management functions. Context: While the LCDBG program was not considered a major program, a monitoring report by the grantor identified issues that were considered to be material weaknesses. Recommendation: Adequate policies and procedures should be implemented to ensure compliance with the grant agreement regarding financial management. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that notification will be made, in writing, of any further changes to the persons or position descriptions relative to the financial management functions related to the LCDBG Program.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: The 2021 Louisiana Community Development Block Grant (LCDBG) Grantee Handbook requires the City to submit a Financial Management Questionnaire outlining individual responsibilities. The City is required to notify the Office of Community Development in writing, of any changes of individuals and their related responsibilities. Condition: An individual signed a check that was not an approved signer. Cause: There were inadequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that the City updated the Financial Management Questionnaire as required by the grant program. Effect: The City did not comply with the grant agreement regarding financial management functions. Context: While the LCDBG program was not considered a major program, a monitoring report by the grantor identified issues that were considered to be material weaknesses. Recommendation: Adequate policies and procedures should be implemented to ensure compliance with the grant agreement regarding financial management. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that notification will be made, in writing, of any further changes to the persons or position descriptions relative to the financial management functions related to the LCDBG Program.
The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that notification will be made, in writing, of any further changes to the persons or position descriptions relative to the financial management functions related to the LCDBG Program.
The City did not notify the Office of Community Development of the contract award until 81 days after the contract award. Cause: The City did not have appropriate policies and procedures to ensure that all contract awards were submitted to the Office of Community Development within the required time frame. Effect: The City did not comply with the grant agreement regarding contract awards. Context: While the LCDBG program was not considered a major program, a monitoring report by the grantor identified issues that were considered to be material weaknesses. Recommendation: Adequate policies and procedures should be implemented to ensure compliance with the grant agreement regarding contract awards. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: This compliance finding relates to the previous administration. The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that it will submit the notice of contract award within thirty days after the contract award date under any future LCDBG program.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: The 2021 Louisiana Community Development Block Grant (LCDBG) Grantee Handbook requires the City to submit a notice of contract award to the Office of Community Development within 30 days after award. Condition: The City did not notify the Office of Community Development of the contract award until 81 days after the contract award. Cause: The City did not have appropriate policies and procedures to ensure that all contract awards were submitted to the Office of Community Development within the required time frame. Effect: The City did not comply with the grant agreement regarding contract awards. Context: While the LCDBG program was not considered a major program, a monitoring report by the grantor identified issues that were considered to be material weaknesses. Recommendation: Adequate policies and procedures should be implemented to ensure compliance with the grant agreement regarding contract awards. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: This compliance finding relates to the previous administration. The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that it will submit the notice of contract award within thirty days after the contract award date under any future LCDBG program.
This compliance finding relates to the previous administration. The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that it will submit the notice of contract award within thirty days after the contract award date under any future LCDBG program.
The City did not award the contract within 45 days of bid opening and was unable to provide documentation of mutual written agreement for the extension of the time period for the award of the contract. Cause: The City did not have proper policies and procedures in place to ensure that the contract was awarded within the proper time frames. Effect: The City did not comply with Louisiana Revised Statute 38:2215. Context: While the LCDBG program was not considered a major program, a monitoring report by the grantor identified issues that were considered to be material weaknesses. Recommendation: Adequate policies and procedures should be implemented to ensure compliance with Louisiana Revised Statutes. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: This compliance finding relates to the previous administration. The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that this requirement will be met under any future LCDBG programs.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: Louisiana Revised Statute 38:2215 requires that the City shall award construction contracts within 45 days of receipt of bids and award said contract to the lowest responsible bidder or reject all bids. However, the City and the lowest responsible bidder, by mutual written consent, may agree to extend the deadline for an award by one or more extensions of thirty calendar days. Condition: The City did not award the contract within 45 days of bid opening and was unable to provide documentation of mutual written agreement for the extension of the time period for the award of the contract. Cause: The City did not have proper policies and procedures in place to ensure that the contract was awarded within the proper time frames. Effect: The City did not comply with Louisiana Revised Statute 38:2215. Context: While the LCDBG program was not considered a major program, a monitoring report by the grantor identified issues that were considered to be material weaknesses. Recommendation: Adequate policies and procedures should be implemented to ensure compliance with Louisiana Revised Statutes. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: This compliance finding relates to the previous administration. The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that this requirement will be met under any future LCDBG programs.
This compliance finding relates to the previous administration. The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that this requirement will be met under any future LCDBG programs.
The City received reimbursement through the State of Louisiana’s Water Sector Program for expenditures that were already claimed through Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. Cause: The City did not have proper controls in place to ensure that expenditures were not paid by multiple federal programs. Effect: The City utilized federal funds to pay for expenditures that had already been charged to other grant programs. Context: A sample of 10 transactions were selected for audit from a population of 16 disbursements. The test found that three disbursements had already been charged to other federal programs. It was determined that $2,570,501 was charged to other federal programs and are considered questioned costs. Recommendation: The City should review policies and procedures to ensure that the City does not continue to request reimbursement for amounts that were received from other sources. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: The City will implement policies and procedures to ensure that the City does not continue to request reimbursement for amounts that were received from other sources.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: Costs charged to federal grant programs must follow the Uniform Guidance when determining if a cost is allowable under the program. One of the requirements is that a cost can only be funded by one program. Condition: The City received reimbursement through the State of Louisiana’s Water Sector Program for expenditures that were already claimed through Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. Cause: The City did not have proper controls in place to ensure that expenditures were not paid by multiple federal programs. Effect: The City utilized federal funds to pay for expenditures that had already been charged to other grant programs. Context: A sample of 10 transactions were selected for audit from a population of 16 disbursements. The test found that three disbursements had already been charged to other federal programs. It was determined that $2,570,501 was charged to other federal programs and are considered questioned costs. Recommendation: The City should review policies and procedures to ensure that the City does not continue to request reimbursement for amounts that were received from other sources. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: The City will implement policies and procedures to ensure that the City does not continue to request reimbursement for amounts that were received from other sources.
The City will implement policies and procedures to ensure that the City does not continue to request reimbursement for amounts that were received from other sources.
The City expended $142,051 of Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds on a contract that exceeded the required threshold but was not put out for bid. Cause: The City expended federal funds on contracts that were not properly bid by federal guidelines. Effect: As a result, the City was not in compliance with procurement requirements with questioned costs totaling $142,051. Context: A sample of 10 disbursements were selected for audit from a population of 16 disbursements. The test found that a vendor was not properly procured. This resulted in questioned costs of $142,051. Recommendation: The City should review their policies and procedures to ensure that all contracts that have federal expenditures are properly bid in accordance with 2 CFR 200.320. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: This compliance finding relates to the previous administration, who did not properly have the vendor bid out in accordance with federal guidelines. The City will review their policies and procedures to ensure that all contracts that have federal expenditures are properly bid in accordance with 2 CFR 200.320.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.320, the City of Carencro is required to formally bid contracts that exceed $250,000. Condition: The City expended $142,051 of Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds on a contract that exceeded the required threshold but was not put out for bid. Cause: The City expended federal funds on contracts that were not properly bid by federal guidelines. Effect: As a result, the City was not in compliance with procurement requirements with questioned costs totaling $142,051. Context: A sample of 10 disbursements were selected for audit from a population of 16 disbursements. The test found that a vendor was not properly procured. This resulted in questioned costs of $142,051. Recommendation: The City should review their policies and procedures to ensure that all contracts that have federal expenditures are properly bid in accordance with 2 CFR 200.320. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: This compliance finding relates to the previous administration, who did not properly have the vendor bid out in accordance with federal guidelines. The City will review their policies and procedures to ensure that all contracts that have federal expenditures are properly bid in accordance with 2 CFR 200.320.
This compliance finding relates to the previous administration, who did not properly have the vendor bid out in accordance with federal guidelines. The City will review their policies and procedures to ensure that all contracts that have federal expenditures are properly bid in accordance with 2 CFR 200.320.
The City did not file the annual report by the required deadline. The report also included inaccurate information regarding the amount spent. Cause: The City does not have adequate controls and procedures over reporting. Effect: The City did not file the annual report with the correct amount of expenditures or within the proper time frame. Context: The City’s annual report was not filed until August. Additionally, the City’s annual report did not reconcile to the amount expended in the amount of $646,575. Recommendation: The City should review their established policies and procedures and make any necessary changes to ensure an effective control environment. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: The City had significant difficulties accessing the reporting website, and filed the report on the day access was granted. However, the City will review their established policies and procedures and make any necessary changes to ensure an effective control environment.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: In accordance with 31 CFR Section 35.4(c), the City should provide an annual report detailing the accounting for the use of the federal award program funds. In addition, the report should be completed and submitted by April 30th of the following year. Condition: The City did not file the annual report by the required deadline. The report also included inaccurate information regarding the amount spent. Cause: The City does not have adequate controls and procedures over reporting. Effect: The City did not file the annual report with the correct amount of expenditures or within the proper time frame. Context: The City’s annual report was not filed until August. Additionally, the City’s annual report did not reconcile to the amount expended in the amount of $646,575. Recommendation: The City should review their established policies and procedures and make any necessary changes to ensure an effective control environment. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: The City had significant difficulties accessing the reporting website, and filed the report on the day access was granted. However, the City will review their established policies and procedures and make any necessary changes to ensure an effective control environment.
The City had significant difficulties accessing the reporting website, and filed the report on the day access was granted. However, the City will review their established policies and procedures and make any necessary changes to ensure an effective control environment.
The City requested reimbursement for retainage amounts for which it had not paid the funds as of the date of the request. Cause: The City was unaware that retainage amounts were included in the request for reimbursement. Effect: The City requested reimbursement for retainage amounts that had not been paid in the amount of $208,790, of which $148,011 was charged to federal award programs. Recommendation: The City should carefully review grant reimbursement requests to ensure that all amounts requested represent actual expenditures. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: The City will review grant reimbursements before submitting to ensure that all amounts requested represent actual expenditures.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: The Water Sector Program guidelines do not allow for advance payments. Condition: The City requested reimbursement for retainage amounts for which it had not paid the funds as of the date of the request. Cause: The City was unaware that retainage amounts were included in the request for reimbursement. Effect: The City requested reimbursement for retainage amounts that had not been paid in the amount of $208,790, of which $148,011 was charged to federal award programs. Recommendation: The City should carefully review grant reimbursement requests to ensure that all amounts requested represent actual expenditures. Management’s Corrective Action Plan: The City will review grant reimbursements before submitting to ensure that all amounts requested represent actual expenditures.
The City will review grant reimbursements before submitting to ensure that all amounts requested represent actual expenditures.
See Compliance Finding 2023-012.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴See Compliance Finding 2023-012.
The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that notification will be made, in writing, of any further changes to the persons or position descriptions relative to the financial management functions related to the LCDBG Program.
See Compliance Finding 2023-013.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴See Compliance Finding 2023-013.
This compliance finding relates to the previous administration. The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that it will submit the notice of contract award within thirty days after the contract award date under any future LCDBG program.
See Compliance Finding 2023-014.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴See Compliance Finding 2023-014.
This compliance finding relates to the previous administration. The City has provided written assurance to the Office of Community Development that this requirement will be met under any future LCDBG programs.
See Compliance Finding 2023-015.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴See Compliance Finding 2023-015.
The City will implement policies and procedures to ensure that the City does not continue to request reimbursement for amounts that were received from other sources.
See Compliance Finding 2023-016.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴See Compliance Finding 2023-016.
This compliance finding relates to the previous administration, who did not properly have the vendor bid out in accordance with federal guidelines. The City will review their policies and procedures to ensure that all contracts that have federal expenditures are properly bid in accordance with 2 CFR 200.320.
See Compliance Finding 2023-017.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴See Compliance Finding 2023-017.
The City had significant difficulties accessing the reporting website, and filed the report on the day access was granted. However, the City will review their established policies and procedures and make any necessary changes to ensure an effective control environment.
See Compliance Finding 2023-018.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴See Compliance Finding 2023-018.
The City will review grant reimbursements before submitting to ensure that all amounts requested represent actual expenditures.
FAC accepted this audit on May 25, 2021 — management decision was due November 25, 2021.
FAC accepted this audit on June 9, 2020 — management decision was due December 9, 2020.
FAC accepted this audit on April 1, 2019 — management decision was due October 1, 2019.
FAC accepted this audit on May 14, 2018 — management decision was due November 14, 2018.
FAC accepted this audit on May 22, 2017 — management decision was due November 22, 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 →
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →Monitor subrecipient audit findings and filing records.
Start monitoring →© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.
