EIN: 750800631
UEI: M613NQYENRM6
Audited by: Sutton Frost Cary, LLP
Oversight agency: 93 [Department of Health and Human Services]
View federal awards & risk assessment →
Data as of August 28, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on June 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 December 15, 2026 (107 days from today).
What is a management decision? →FAC accepted this audit on June 25, 2025 — management decision was due December 25, 2025.
FAC accepted this audit on June 13, 2024 — management decision was due December 13, 2024.
During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 8 of the 65 payroll transactions tested, the amount charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the general ledger service category descriptions. Effect: The Council's reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. The cumulative effect of the exceptions noted during tested resulted in the grants being undercharged by the Council. Per Management's Corrective Action plan, this finding was fully resolved as of April 2024. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure amount charged to the grants agree to timesheets and payroll registers before the request for reimbursement is submitted. Management’s Response: The corrective action plan detailed on page 31 was fully implemented as of April 2024
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2023-001: Allowable costs – significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Community Services Block Grant ALN 93.569 Emergency Rental Assistance Program ALN 21.023 Criteria: The Council’s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees timesheets and hours agree to the payroll register and amount allocated to grant activities. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 8 of the 65 payroll transactions tested, the amount charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the general ledger service category descriptions. Effect: The Council's reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. The cumulative effect of the exceptions noted during tested resulted in the grants being undercharged by the Council. Per Management's Corrective Action plan, this finding was fully resolved as of April 2024. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure amount charged to the grants agree to timesheets and payroll registers before the request for reimbursement is submitted. Management’s Response: The corrective action plan detailed on page 31 was fully implemented as of April 2024
Finding 2023-001: Allowable costs – significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Management Response CCGD was issued monitoring findings by HHSC for the monitoring period October 2021 (FY 21) -November 2022 (FY 22) in April 2023. As a result of that finding, CCGD received a finding in its 2022 audit. Because of the timing of the findings, as noted in the 2023 audit report, there was not time to resolve the issue before 2023. Therefore, even though the below described plan was implemented in 2023, immediately upon receipt of the initial finding, CCGD was still issued a finding in its FY2023 audit. The notification was received in the 7th month of fiscal year 2023, the following plan has been implemented. o Timesheet and GL mismatch i. Management Response: 1. Perform an audit of existing setup of HRIS-Paycom system to determinecause of mismatch 2. If needed, reimplement Paycom with required setup or change vendors 3. All departments along with respective service categories werereestablished in Paycom to only display employees applicable servicecategories based their respective grants. 4. Conduct quarterly audits of timesheets and GL to ensure there are nomismatches. 5. Time study was performed on quarterly basis to ensure individualperformance complies with funders mandate. ii. Progress Update - GL and Timesheet Mismatch: 1. Audit of existing setup to review the following: a. Department(s) - revised department names/descriptions i. Made changes to all applicable employees’ setup. b. Home Allocation(s) – revised home allocation(s)i. Revised/edited the default home allocation description ii. Assigned correct default home allocation to employees c. Service Categories i. Revised/edited service categories assigned to each department 2. Observations: a. Following Paycom updates, CCGD experienced technical challenges due to software glitches which continued to result in timesheet and GL mismatches. CCGD is continuing to work with Paycom to identify and eliminate the problem. b. CCGD subsequently sought assistance from Paycom in the troubleshooting process. 3. Departmental training of timekeeping process a. Personalized standard operating procedures used b. Real-time examples/instruction provided to staff in training session(s) 4. Post-training audits conducted to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheetsiii. Future Steps and Anticipated Timeline: 1. Continuation of post-training audits to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheets 2. With an anticipated deadline completion date of December 31, 2023, for adherence of full compliance, CCGD effectively implemented system updates prior to this deadline to ensure payroll processing is now based on the actual time and effort performed. iv. Progress Update – Performance Activity Report 1. To provide further back up to time and effort, an additional option in Paycom was enabled for staff to enter notes on day-to-day activity. 2. Departmental training on this goal was performed and completed as of March 31, 2024. 3. Continuation of post-training audits to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheets v. Post implementation plan and observation: CCGD is fully committed to complying with funders and audit standards. Furthermore, CCGD will continue to monitor and identify any potential errors in its payroll reporting to bring a timely solution if required. Furthermore, minor reporting errors occur in payroll GL reports on a random basis. The errors appear to be technical, and as such, we are currently working with Paycom to resolve this issue. Additionally, CCGD will continue to perform time study to ensure that all salary expenses and allocations are adhered to the respective program budget. Parties Responsible: Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Director - Human Resources
2022-001
During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 8 of the 65 payroll transactions tested, the amount charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the general ledger service category descriptions. Effect: The Council's reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. The cumulative effect of the exceptions noted during tested resulted in the grants being undercharged by the Council. Per Management's Corrective Action plan, this finding was fully resolved as of April 2024. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure amount charged to the grants agree to timesheets and payroll registers before the request for reimbursement is submitted. Management’s Response: The corrective action plan detailed on page 31 was fully implemented as of April 2024.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2023-001: Allowable costs – significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Community Services Block Grant ALN 93.569 Emergency Rental Assistance Program ALN 21.023 Criteria: The Council’s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees timesheets and hours agree to the payroll register and amount allocated to grant activities. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 8 of the 65 payroll transactions tested, the amount charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the general ledger service category descriptions. Effect: The Council's reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. The cumulative effect of the exceptions noted during tested resulted in the grants being undercharged by the Council. Per Management's Corrective Action plan, this finding was fully resolved as of April 2024. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure amount charged to the grants agree to timesheets and payroll registers before the request for reimbursement is submitted. Management’s Response: The corrective action plan detailed on page 31 was fully implemented as of April 2024.
Finding 2023-001: Allowable costs – significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Management Response CCGD was issued monitoring findings by HHSC for the monitoring period October 2021 (FY 21) -November 2022 (FY 22) in April 2023. As a result of that finding, CCGD received a finding in its 2022 audit. Because of the timing of the findings, as noted in the 2023 audit report, there was not time to resolve the issue before 2023. Therefore, even though the below described plan was implemented in 2023, immediately upon receipt of the initial finding, CCGD was still issued a finding in its FY2023 audit. The notification was received in the 7th month of fiscal year 2023, the following plan has been implemented. o Timesheet and GL mismatch i. Management Response: 1. Perform an audit of existing setup of HRIS-Paycom system to determinecause of mismatch 2. If needed, reimplement Paycom with required setup or change vendors 3. All departments along with respective service categories werereestablished in Paycom to only display employees applicable servicecategories based their respective grants. 4. Conduct quarterly audits of timesheets and GL to ensure there are nomismatches. 5. Time study was performed on quarterly basis to ensure individualperformance complies with funders mandate. ii. Progress Update - GL and Timesheet Mismatch: 1. Audit of existing setup to review the following: a. Department(s) - revised department names/descriptions i. Made changes to all applicable employees’ setup. b. Home Allocation(s) – revised home allocation(s)i. Revised/edited the default home allocation description ii. Assigned correct default home allocation to employees c. Service Categories i. Revised/edited service categories assigned to each department 2. Observations: a. Following Paycom updates, CCGD experienced technical challenges due to software glitches which continued to result in timesheet and GL mismatches. CCGD is continuing to work with Paycom to identify and eliminate the problem. b. CCGD subsequently sought assistance from Paycom in the troubleshooting process. 3. Departmental training of timekeeping process a. Personalized standard operating procedures used b. Real-time examples/instruction provided to staff in training session(s) 4. Post-training audits conducted to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheetsiii. Future Steps and Anticipated Timeline: 1. Continuation of post-training audits to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheets 2. With an anticipated deadline completion date of December 31, 2023, for adherence of full compliance, CCGD effectively implemented system updates prior to this deadline to ensure payroll processing is now based on the actual time and effort performed. iv. Progress Update – Performance Activity Report 1. To provide further back up to time and effort, an additional option in Paycom was enabled for staff to enter notes on day-to-day activity. 2. Departmental training on this goal was performed and completed as of March 31, 2024. 3. Continuation of post-training audits to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheets v. Post implementation plan and observation: CCGD is fully committed to complying with funders and audit standards. Furthermore, CCGD will continue to monitor and identify any potential errors in its payroll reporting to bring a timely solution if required. Furthermore, minor reporting errors occur in payroll GL reports on a random basis. The errors appear to be technical, and as such, we are currently working with Paycom to resolve this issue. Additionally, CCGD will continue to perform time study to ensure that all salary expenses and allocations are adhered to the respective program budget. Parties Responsible: Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Director - Human Resources
2022-001
FAC accepted this audit on September 10, 2024 — management decision was due March 10, 2025.
During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 8 of the 65 payroll transactions tested, the amount charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the general ledger service category descriptions. Effect: The Council's reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. The cumulative effect of the exceptions noted during tested resulted in the grants being undercharged by the Council. Per Management's Corrective Action plan, this finding was fully resolved as of April 2024. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure amount charged to the grants agree to timesheets and payroll registers before the request for reimbursement is submitted. Management’s Response: The corrective action plan detailed on page 31 was fully implemented as of April 2024
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2023-001: Allowable costs – significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Community Services Block Grant ALN 93.569 Emergency Rental Assistance Program ALN 21.023 Criteria: The Council’s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees timesheets and hours agree to the payroll register and amount allocated to grant activities. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 8 of the 65 payroll transactions tested, the amount charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the general ledger service category descriptions. Effect: The Council's reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. The cumulative effect of the exceptions noted during tested resulted in the grants being undercharged by the Council. Per Management's Corrective Action plan, this finding was fully resolved as of April 2024. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure amount charged to the grants agree to timesheets and payroll registers before the request for reimbursement is submitted. Management’s Response: The corrective action plan detailed on page 31 was fully implemented as of April 2024
Finding 2023-001: Allowable costs – significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Management Response CCGD was issued monitoring findings by HHSC for the monitoring period October 2021 (FY 21) -November 2022 (FY 22) in April 2023. As a result of that finding, CCGD received a finding in its 2022 audit. Because of the timing of the findings, as noted in the 2023 audit report, there was not time to resolve the issue before 2023. Therefore, even though the below described plan was implemented in 2023, immediately upon receipt of the initial finding, CCGD was still issued a finding in its FY2023 audit. The notification was received in the 7th month of fiscal year 2023, the following plan has been implemented. o Timesheet and GL mismatch i. Management Response: 1. Perform an audit of existing setup of HRIS-Paycom system to determinecause of mismatch 2. If needed, reimplement Paycom with required setup or change vendors 3. All departments along with respective service categories werereestablished in Paycom to only display employees applicable servicecategories based their respective grants. 4. Conduct quarterly audits of timesheets and GL to ensure there are nomismatches. 5. Time study was performed on quarterly basis to ensure individualperformance complies with funders mandate. ii. Progress Update - GL and Timesheet Mismatch: 1. Audit of existing setup to review the following: a. Department(s) - revised department names/descriptions i. Made changes to all applicable employees’ setup. b. Home Allocation(s) – revised home allocation(s)i. Revised/edited the default home allocation description ii. Assigned correct default home allocation to employees c. Service Categories i. Revised/edited service categories assigned to each department 2. Observations: a. Following Paycom updates, CCGD experienced technical challenges due to software glitches which continued to result in timesheet and GL mismatches. CCGD is continuing to work with Paycom to identify and eliminate the problem. b. CCGD subsequently sought assistance from Paycom in the troubleshooting process. 3. Departmental training of timekeeping process a. Personalized standard operating procedures used b. Real-time examples/instruction provided to staff in training session(s) 4. Post-training audits conducted to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheetsiii. Future Steps and Anticipated Timeline: 1. Continuation of post-training audits to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheets 2. With an anticipated deadline completion date of December 31, 2023, for adherence of full compliance, CCGD effectively implemented system updates prior to this deadline to ensure payroll processing is now based on the actual time and effort performed. iv. Progress Update – Performance Activity Report 1. To provide further back up to time and effort, an additional option in Paycom was enabled for staff to enter notes on day-to-day activity. 2. Departmental training on this goal was performed and completed as of March 31, 2024. 3. Continuation of post-training audits to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheets v. Post implementation plan and observation: CCGD is fully committed to complying with funders and audit standards. Furthermore, CCGD will continue to monitor and identify any potential errors in its payroll reporting to bring a timely solution if required. Furthermore, minor reporting errors occur in payroll GL reports on a random basis. The errors appear to be technical, and as such, we are currently working with Paycom to resolve this issue. Additionally, CCGD will continue to perform time study to ensure that all salary expenses and allocations are adhered to the respective program budget. Parties Responsible: Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Director - Human Resources
2022-001
During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 8 of the 65 payroll transactions tested, the amount charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the general ledger service category descriptions. Effect: The Council's reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. The cumulative effect of the exceptions noted during tested resulted in the grants being undercharged by the Council. Per Management's Corrective Action plan, this finding was fully resolved as of April 2024. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure amount charged to the grants agree to timesheets and payroll registers before the request for reimbursement is submitted. Management’s Response: The corrective action plan detailed on page 31 was fully implemented as of April 2024.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2023-001: Allowable costs – significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Community Services Block Grant ALN 93.569 Emergency Rental Assistance Program ALN 21.023 Criteria: The Council’s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees timesheets and hours agree to the payroll register and amount allocated to grant activities. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 8 of the 65 payroll transactions tested, the amount charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the general ledger service category descriptions. Effect: The Council's reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. The cumulative effect of the exceptions noted during tested resulted in the grants being undercharged by the Council. Per Management's Corrective Action plan, this finding was fully resolved as of April 2024. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure amount charged to the grants agree to timesheets and payroll registers before the request for reimbursement is submitted. Management’s Response: The corrective action plan detailed on page 31 was fully implemented as of April 2024.
Finding 2023-001: Allowable costs – significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Management Response CCGD was issued monitoring findings by HHSC for the monitoring period October 2021 (FY 21) -November 2022 (FY 22) in April 2023. As a result of that finding, CCGD received a finding in its 2022 audit. Because of the timing of the findings, as noted in the 2023 audit report, there was not time to resolve the issue before 2023. Therefore, even though the below described plan was implemented in 2023, immediately upon receipt of the initial finding, CCGD was still issued a finding in its FY2023 audit. The notification was received in the 7th month of fiscal year 2023, the following plan has been implemented. o Timesheet and GL mismatch i. Management Response: 1. Perform an audit of existing setup of HRIS-Paycom system to determinecause of mismatch 2. If needed, reimplement Paycom with required setup or change vendors 3. All departments along with respective service categories werereestablished in Paycom to only display employees applicable servicecategories based their respective grants. 4. Conduct quarterly audits of timesheets and GL to ensure there are nomismatches. 5. Time study was performed on quarterly basis to ensure individualperformance complies with funders mandate. ii. Progress Update - GL and Timesheet Mismatch: 1. Audit of existing setup to review the following: a. Department(s) - revised department names/descriptions i. Made changes to all applicable employees’ setup. b. Home Allocation(s) – revised home allocation(s)i. Revised/edited the default home allocation description ii. Assigned correct default home allocation to employees c. Service Categories i. Revised/edited service categories assigned to each department 2. Observations: a. Following Paycom updates, CCGD experienced technical challenges due to software glitches which continued to result in timesheet and GL mismatches. CCGD is continuing to work with Paycom to identify and eliminate the problem. b. CCGD subsequently sought assistance from Paycom in the troubleshooting process. 3. Departmental training of timekeeping process a. Personalized standard operating procedures used b. Real-time examples/instruction provided to staff in training session(s) 4. Post-training audits conducted to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheetsiii. Future Steps and Anticipated Timeline: 1. Continuation of post-training audits to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheets 2. With an anticipated deadline completion date of December 31, 2023, for adherence of full compliance, CCGD effectively implemented system updates prior to this deadline to ensure payroll processing is now based on the actual time and effort performed. iv. Progress Update – Performance Activity Report 1. To provide further back up to time and effort, an additional option in Paycom was enabled for staff to enter notes on day-to-day activity. 2. Departmental training on this goal was performed and completed as of March 31, 2024. 3. Continuation of post-training audits to include: a. Timecard/sheet review b. GL review and comparison of timecards and sheets v. Post implementation plan and observation: CCGD is fully committed to complying with funders and audit standards. Furthermore, CCGD will continue to monitor and identify any potential errors in its payroll reporting to bring a timely solution if required. Furthermore, minor reporting errors occur in payroll GL reports on a random basis. The errors appear to be technical, and as such, we are currently working with Paycom to resolve this issue. Additionally, CCGD will continue to perform time study to ensure that all salary expenses and allocations are adhered to the respective program budget. Parties Responsible: Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Director - Human Resources
2022-001
FAC accepted this audit on June 19, 2023 — management decision was due December 19, 2023.
During allowable costs testing for federal grants, 17 out of 50 timesheets tested did not agree to the number of hours worked on the payroll register and subsequently charged to the grant. During allowable costs testing for state grants, 7 out of 25 timesheets tested did not agree to the number of hours worked on the payroll register and subsequently charged to the grant. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the GL service category descriptions. Effect: The Council?s reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure all timesheets are completed and agree to the payroll register before payroll is processed and reimbursement requests for the period are initiated. Management?s Response: See corrective action plan
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2022-001: Allowable costs ? material weakness in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. The Aging Cluster ALN 93.044/93.045 Community Services Block Grant ALN 93.569 The Aging Cluster ? State General Revenue Medical Assistance Program ? State General Revenue Criteria: The Council?s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees maintain timesheets and hours and rates per timesheet agree to the payroll register and amount allocated to grant activities. Condition: During allowable costs testing for federal grants, 17 out of 50 timesheets tested did not agree to the number of hours worked on the payroll register and subsequently charged to the grant. During allowable costs testing for state grants, 7 out of 25 timesheets tested did not agree to the number of hours worked on the payroll register and subsequently charged to the grant. Cause: Prior to May 2023, percentage labor distributions were based on grant budgeted allocations in our payroll system for those employees working out of multiple service categories. Additionally, service category descriptions in the payroll system did not match 100% with the GL service category descriptions. Effect: The Council?s reporting of grant time and effort was not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: Management should ensure all timesheets are completed and agree to the payroll register before payroll is processed and reimbursement requests for the period are initiated. Management?s Response: See corrective action plan
Finding 2022-001: Allowable costs - material weakness in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding- timesheet and GL mismatch. CCGD will perform an audit of the existing setup of its HRIS-PayCom system to determine what is causing the mismatch between timesheets and payroll GL. If required, CCGD will re-implement PayCom with the required setup or change vendors to assure that all internal control requirements are addressed. This action will be followed by a quarterly audit of timesheets and payroll GL to ensure that there are no more mismatches. Additionally, management will perform a time study audit on a quarterly basis to ensure that individual performances comply.
FAC accepted this audit on June 9, 2022 — management decision was due December 9, 2022.
FAC accepted this audit on August 19, 2021 — management decision was due February 19, 2022.
FAC accepted this audit on December 13, 2020 — management decision was due June 13, 2021.
During allowable costs testing for federal grants, 20 out of 50 timesheets tested did not contain supervisor signature. During allowable costs testing for federal grants, 4 out of 50 employees did not have timesheets on file. During allowable costs testing for state grants, 3 out of 8 timesheets tested did not contain supervisor signature. Cause: In FY19 CCGD did not require timesheets for leadership level employees, which does not comply with their internal control over compliance procedures. Lack of timesheet review and approval was due to oversight at the supervisor level and inadequate enforcement by management. Effect: CCGD?s reporting of grant time and effort is not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. Recommendation: Management should ensure all timesheets are completed and signed by a supervisor before reimbursement requests for the period are initiated.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: CCGD?s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees maintain timesheets that are reviewed and approved, as indicated by supervisor signature. Condition: During allowable costs testing for federal grants, 20 out of 50 timesheets tested did not contain supervisor signature. During allowable costs testing for federal grants, 4 out of 50 employees did not have timesheets on file. During allowable costs testing for state grants, 3 out of 8 timesheets tested did not contain supervisor signature. Cause: In FY19 CCGD did not require timesheets for leadership level employees, which does not comply with their internal control over compliance procedures. Lack of timesheet review and approval was due to oversight at the supervisor level and inadequate enforcement by management. Effect: CCGD?s reporting of grant time and effort is not fully documented, in accordance with internal control over compliance procedures. Recommendation: Management should ensure all timesheets are completed and signed by a supervisor before reimbursement requests for the period are initiated.
The agency has implemented annual training/refresher courses with accompanying standard operating procedures for management and employees alike. Training was completed on: April 4, 2019 April 22 ? 24th, 2020 Additionally, as a final control measure, the agency has implemented quarterly timesheet audits conducted by CEO, CFO and HR. In these audits, three Paycom reports are run and reviewed including a timecard approval report. A review of personnel activity reports for grant-funded positions are also completed during this audit. The findings of the inaugural audit identified the need for one final management training, primarily for salary-exempt employees for added clarification. During payroll processing, management would also begin receiving emails for all unverified timecards/sheets prior to final transmission and tracking of these notifications maintained for disciplinary purposes. Update: Final refresher meetings were conducted on 10/28 and 11/6 for each department identified as needing further training due to timecard/sheet compliance issues.
2018-001
During allowable cost testing for federal grants, 4 out of 50 invoices tested did not have documented approval from management. During allowable cost testing for state grants, 3 out of 25 invoices tested did not have documented approval from management. Cause: In FY19, CCGD did not require approval on repeating monthly invoices, which was not in accordance with their internal control procedures over compliance. Effect: CCGD?s reporting of grant expenses was not fully documented, in accordance with the internal control over compliance procedures. Recommendation: Management should ensure documentation of approval of all invoices are kept on file.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: CCGD?s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all invoices be approved management. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, 4 out of 50 invoices tested did not have documented approval from management. During allowable cost testing for state grants, 3 out of 25 invoices tested did not have documented approval from management. Cause: In FY19, CCGD did not require approval on repeating monthly invoices, which was not in accordance with their internal control procedures over compliance. Effect: CCGD?s reporting of grant expenses was not fully documented, in accordance with the internal control over compliance procedures. Recommendation: Management should ensure documentation of approval of all invoices are kept on file.
A multi-tier approval process has been established between programs and finance. Programs have an approval process of at least 2 tiers where department head approval is required before a payment request can be submitted to finance. All vendor invoices are required to be submitted to the Accounting Software i.e. Sage Intacct via purchasing order module. Within finance, a multi-level approval process has been established based on the amount of the invoice to further reinforce internal control.
2018-001
CCGD does not have a documented system to evaluate the risk of noncompliance for subrecipients. Cause: CCGD was not aware of the requirement to have a documented system to evaluate the risk of noncompliance for subrecipients. Effect: CCGD was not in compliance with subrecipient monitoring risk assessment requirements as specified by Section 200.331(b) of the Uniform Guidance. Questioned cost: None Recommendation: CCGD should create a documented system to evaluate the risk of noncompliance for subrecipients that includes factors as required by Section 200.331(b) of the Uniform Guidance.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: In accordance with Section 200.331(b) of the Uniform Guidance, passthrough agencies should have a documented system to evaluate the risk of noncompliance for each subrecipient. Condition: CCGD does not have a documented system to evaluate the risk of noncompliance for subrecipients. Cause: CCGD was not aware of the requirement to have a documented system to evaluate the risk of noncompliance for subrecipients. Effect: CCGD was not in compliance with subrecipient monitoring risk assessment requirements as specified by Section 200.331(b) of the Uniform Guidance. Questioned cost: None Recommendation: CCGD should create a documented system to evaluate the risk of noncompliance for subrecipients that includes factors as required by Section 200.331(b) of the Uniform Guidance.
Full scale sub monitoring package along with risk assessment and scoring of all the sub recipients was implemented in the first quarter of FY 20. All subrecipients are monitored annually by an external audit firm. The contract department is required to use the audit results to assess and score each of their sub recipients on annual basis to completely determine any risk and have better control over the allowability of the reimbursable activities. All monitoring and assessments are to be submitted to the CFO on annual basis.
CCGD was requesting reimbursement for payments to subrecipients on a basis of 1/12th the total annual award to the subrecipient instead of actual amounts passed through to subrecipients each month. Cause: CCGD had significant turnover in management and was unaware that requesting reimbursement on the basis of expected subrecipient passthrough payments instead of actual was not consistent with grant terms. Effect: CCGD requested reimbursement from the state before actual costs were incurred. Before year-end, CCGD calculated actual expense and adjusted grant reimbursement requests accordingly. Questioned costs : None Recommendation: CCGD should request for reimbursement only amounts actually passed through to subrecipients.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: The grant requires that grantees incur a cost prior to claiming reimbursement. Condition: CCGD was requesting reimbursement for payments to subrecipients on a basis of 1/12th the total annual award to the subrecipient instead of actual amounts passed through to subrecipients each month. Cause: CCGD had significant turnover in management and was unaware that requesting reimbursement on the basis of expected subrecipient passthrough payments instead of actual was not consistent with grant terms. Effect: CCGD requested reimbursement from the state before actual costs were incurred. Before year-end, CCGD calculated actual expense and adjusted grant reimbursement requests accordingly. Questioned costs : None Recommendation: CCGD should request for reimbursement only amounts actually passed through to subrecipients.
In late FY 2019, auto accruals on the Accounting Software was disabled. CFO along with Grants Management reviews the monthly financials at the time of seeking reimbursements to ensure that only allowable transactions are posted in the system.
During allowable cost testing client expenses were noted for clients not on the client list provided to the auditor for eligibility sampling. Three clients who had expenses included in allowable cost testing were not included on the client list population for FY19. Cause: CCGD had multiple client databases during the year ended September 30, 2019, causing difficulties in compiling complete client listings for the year. Effect: The three clients not included on the client list were selected for eligibility testing and were ultimately found to be eligible. However, CCGD could not produce an accurate client list for the 477 Cluster for FY19. Recommendation: A detailed client list should be maintained for each program to ensure a complete and accurate population of clients served with federal and state funds.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: The Organization should have a client tracking system in place that easily identifies clients served under the different types of grants the Organization administers. Condition: During allowable cost testing client expenses were noted for clients not on the client list provided to the auditor for eligibility sampling. Three clients who had expenses included in allowable cost testing were not included on the client list population for FY19. Cause: CCGD had multiple client databases during the year ended September 30, 2019, causing difficulties in compiling complete client listings for the year. Effect: The three clients not included on the client list were selected for eligibility testing and were ultimately found to be eligible. However, CCGD could not produce an accurate client list for the 477 Cluster for FY19. Recommendation: A detailed client list should be maintained for each program to ensure a complete and accurate population of clients served with federal and state funds.
There is now only one client database in CAP60, although clients can still be identified by program. A new procedure was implemented in the 3rd quarter of FY 20 whereby all purchasing orders are required to contain the client name in addition to the vendor information at the time of requesting payment. This additional step will enable finance to extract all or specific client information from the accounting system. Starting FY 21, further emphasis and training will be provided to the 477 cluster Data team at the time of quarterly reconciliations with CAP 60.
During allowable cost testing, one employee out of 25 tested did not have documentation of their approved pay-rate that agreed to the rate paid in the pay period selected for testing. Cause: Human resources did not have a standard procedure in place to document employee pay changes. Effect: CCGD?s reporting of employee wages is not fully documented in accordance with internal control over compliance. The difference between the approved payrate on file and the amount paid was $0.27 per hour. Questioned costs: None Recommendation: CCGD should maintain documentation of all approved employee pay-rates.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: The Organization?s internal controls stipulate that documentation be maintained of employees? pay rates as approved by management and/or the board of directors. Condition: During allowable cost testing, one employee out of 25 tested did not have documentation of their approved pay-rate that agreed to the rate paid in the pay period selected for testing. Cause: Human resources did not have a standard procedure in place to document employee pay changes. Effect: CCGD?s reporting of employee wages is not fully documented in accordance with internal control over compliance. The difference between the approved payrate on file and the amount paid was $0.27 per hour. Questioned costs: None Recommendation: CCGD should maintain documentation of all approved employee pay-rates.
The agency has since implemented the following compliance procedures with accompanying approval levels: 1. Requisition Form (for new positions/postings) ? Senior Director Approval ? Grants Management Approval ? CEO Approval *Human Resources will not post a position until all approvals have been confirmed and fully executed form received from CEO. 2. Personnel Action Form (for position/compensation, lateral and reporting structure changes) ? Manager ? CFO ? CEO ? HR *Human Resources will not update the payroll system until all approvals have been confirmed and fully executed form received.
CCGD was unable to provide a detail of expenses that agreed in total to amounts reported as revenue from Aging Cluster grants. Cause: Due to heavy turnover in upper management and the accounting department, CCGD relied heavily upon journal entry accounting in their financial module. This lead to the inability to recreate a list of expenses supporting reimbursable revenue from the Aging Cluster grants in FY19. Effect: CCGD?s detail of allowable expenses for the Aging Cluster was higher than the revenue reported on the schedule of federal awards. As such, no questioned costs arose. Recommendation: CCGD should maintain documentation expenditures by line item for each reimbursement request made for all cost reimbursement grants.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: Amounts requested from funder for Aging Cluster grants should be fully supported by allowable expenditures. Condition: CCGD was unable to provide a detail of expenses that agreed in total to amounts reported as revenue from Aging Cluster grants. Cause: Due to heavy turnover in upper management and the accounting department, CCGD relied heavily upon journal entry accounting in their financial module. This lead to the inability to recreate a list of expenses supporting reimbursable revenue from the Aging Cluster grants in FY19. Effect: CCGD?s detail of allowable expenses for the Aging Cluster was higher than the revenue reported on the schedule of federal awards. As such, no questioned costs arose. Recommendation: CCGD should maintain documentation expenditures by line item for each reimbursement request made for all cost reimbursement grants.
As part of monthly close, both finance and programs are required to reconcile revenues and expenses at the time of RFPs. Grants Management will ensure that all activities are allowable per the federal guidelines and programmatic mandate. In addition to implementation of transaction-based process, all fiscal and programmatic data will be reconciled before reporting to the any funder. To remain in compliance with the CSBG organizational standards, budget versus actuals reports by each grant is also presented to the finance committee in their monthly meeting.
FAC accepted this audit on June 26, 2019 — management decision was due December 26, 2019.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
FAC accepted this audit on May 29, 2018 — management decision was due November 29, 2018.
FAC accepted this audit on April 13, 2017 — management decision was due October 13, 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 Texas →
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.
