EIN: 726001417
UEI: PEMCXFYRB959
Audited by: Bosch & Statham, LLC
Oversight agency: 20 [Department of Transportation]
View federal awards & risk assessment →
Showing data from August 31, 2026 — the Federal Audit Clearinghouse is under high demand right now, so this couldn't be refreshed. This is the most recent data on record, not necessarily today's.
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on October 2, 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 April 2, 2026 (153 days ago).
What is a management decision? →FAC accepted this audit on September 30, 2024 — management decision was due March 30, 2025.
FAC accepted this audit on September 10, 2023 — management decision was due March 10, 2024.
2022-001 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (Assistance Listing No. 21.027) Material Weakness Internal controls were not designed to prevent the condition described below. Condition The Police Jury awarded to a water system (the System) a portion of the funds received under the grant. The Police Jury did not advise the System of federal, state, and local procurement requirements. The System?s engineer estimated the project to total $252,228. The project included four water wells. The System considered each water well to be a separate project. Therefore, only quotes were obtained when formal bids were required. Criteria Federal regulations require such work to be advertised and let by contract. Additionally, Louisiana Revised Statute (LRS) 38:2212(C) requires all public work exceeding the contract limit (currently $250,000) to be done by a public entity to be advertised and let by contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder who bid according to the bidding documents as advertised. LRS 38:2212(V) expressly prohibits the separation of a public works project into smaller projects if that separation would have the effect of avoiding the public bid requirement. Finally, UPPJ Procurement Policy states that construction projects exceeding $100,000 should be let through competitive sealed bids/formal advertising. Cause The expenditure of the American Rescue Plan Act funds is uncharted territory for everyone. It does not appear that the Police Jury or the Water System intended to circumvent any policies, regulations, or laws. The Police Jury later realized that assistance was required. At that time, the Police Jury engaged a consultant.Effect The costs could be considered disallowed. The Police Jury could be required to return the funds to the United States Treasury. Context The estimated project cost is $252,228. Recommendation We recommend that the Police Jury evaluate its written policy and procedures and revise them as necessary to ensure compliance in the future. The policies and procedures should include the process for awarding funds to subrecipients. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions The Police Jury agrees with the finding. The Police Jury engaged a consultant and is in the process of revising its policies and procedures.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2022-001 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (Assistance Listing No. 21.027) Material Weakness Internal controls were not designed to prevent the condition described below. Condition The Police Jury awarded to a water system (the System) a portion of the funds received under the grant. The Police Jury did not advise the System of federal, state, and local procurement requirements. The System?s engineer estimated the project to total $252,228. The project included four water wells. The System considered each water well to be a separate project. Therefore, only quotes were obtained when formal bids were required. Criteria Federal regulations require such work to be advertised and let by contract. Additionally, Louisiana Revised Statute (LRS) 38:2212(C) requires all public work exceeding the contract limit (currently $250,000) to be done by a public entity to be advertised and let by contract to the lowest responsible and responsive bidder who bid according to the bidding documents as advertised. LRS 38:2212(V) expressly prohibits the separation of a public works project into smaller projects if that separation would have the effect of avoiding the public bid requirement. Finally, UPPJ Procurement Policy states that construction projects exceeding $100,000 should be let through competitive sealed bids/formal advertising. Cause The expenditure of the American Rescue Plan Act funds is uncharted territory for everyone. It does not appear that the Police Jury or the Water System intended to circumvent any policies, regulations, or laws. The Police Jury later realized that assistance was required. At that time, the Police Jury engaged a consultant.Effect The costs could be considered disallowed. The Police Jury could be required to return the funds to the United States Treasury. Context The estimated project cost is $252,228. Recommendation We recommend that the Police Jury evaluate its written policy and procedures and revise them as necessary to ensure compliance in the future. The policies and procedures should include the process for awarding funds to subrecipients. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions The Police Jury agrees with the finding. The Police Jury engaged a consultant and is in the process of revising its policies and procedures.
Responsible Official: Paula Strickland, Secretary-Treasurer The expenditure of the American Rescue Plan Act funds is uncharted territory for everyone. We did not intend to circumvent the bid law or federal procurement regulations. Our objective was only to provide funds to the entities who need it. When we realized we needed assistance, we engaged a consultant to assist us in managing the funds . Unfortunately, this was after the expenditure of funds referenced in the funding. In the future, we will seek the advice of consultants before any action is taken. We will revise our policies to reflect this change.
FAC accepted this audit on July 27, 2022 — management decision was due January 27, 2023.
FAC accepted this audit on January 13, 2022 — management decision was due July 13, 2022.
FAC accepted this audit on August 31, 2020 — management decision was due March 3, 2021.
FAC accepted this audit on January 5, 2020 — management decision was due July 5, 2020.
FAC accepted this audit on September 24, 2018 — management decision was due March 24, 2019.
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.
