Dallas County

2025 – 002 Subrecipient Monitoring – Missing Contract Elements Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Title: HIV Emergency Relief Project Grants HIV Care Formula Grants ALN: 93.914 93.917 Pass-Through Agency: Texas Department of State Health Services Pass-Through Number(s): N/A Award Number and Period: HIV Emergency Relief Project Grants H89HA00014-34, H89HA00014-35 March 1, 2024 – February 28, 2025, March 1, 2025 – February 28, 2026 HIV Care Formula Grants HHS001122200003 April 1, 2022 – March 31, 2026 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) 2025 – 002 Subrecipient Monitoring – Missing Contract Elements (Continued) Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), Dallas County must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it is managing the Federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 2 CFR section 200.332(a), all pass-through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the certain required information provided. A pass-through entity must provide the best available information when some of the required information is unavailable. A pass-through entity must provide unavailable information when it is obtained. Required information includes the subrecipient’s unique entity identifier (UEI), federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date of award to the recipient by the granting agency, and the name of federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass-through entity. Condition: Audit procedures included a review of subaward agreements for required information. We noted the following instances of noncompliance: HIV Emergency Relief Project Grants – The UEI was not included in any of the five subaward agreements selected for testing. The start and end dates for the agreements were March 1, 2024 – February 28, 2025. HIV Care Formula Grants – The UEI, FAIN, federal award date of award to the recipient by the granting agency, and the name of federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass-through entity were not included in any of the five subaward agreements selected for testing. The start and end dates for the agreements were March 1, 2024 – February 28, 2025. Questioned costs: None. Context: See “Condition.” Cause: The current contract review process to ensure all required elements are included per 2 CFR 200 §200.332 prior to execution is not at the correct precision level. Effect: As required subaward information was left out of contracts, Dallas County increased the risk that subrecipients were not fully informed of the federal award details necessary to properly administer the funds in compliance with the applicable statutes, regulations, and award terms. Missing contract elements may impede subrecipients’ ability to accurately identify the federal program, appropriately report activities, and meet federal requirements, including those related to financial management, performance, subrecipient monitoring, and audit preparation. Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) 2025 – 002 Subrecipient Monitoring – Missing Contract Elements (Continued) Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend management enhance existing controls around the review of all subaward agreements to ensure that all pass-through agreements include each of the required elements noted in 2 CFR §200.332. Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan.

2025 – 003 Eligibility Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program Title: Housing Voucher Cluster ALN: 14.871 14.879 Pass-Through Agency: N/A Pass-Through Number(s): N/A Award Period: October 1, 2024 – September 30, 2025 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), Dallas County must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it is managing the Federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 24 CFR 5.233, Dallas County must use HUD's Enterprise Income Verification (EIV) system in its entirety: • As a third-party source to verify tenant employment and income information during annual and streamlined reexaminations of family composition and income, in accordance with 24 CFR 5.236 and administrative guidance issued by HUD; and • To reduce administrative and subsidy payment errors in accordance with HUD administrative guidance. Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) 2025 – 003 Eligibility (Continued) Condition: Audit procedures included a review of 40 participants. For three of 40, the EIV system was not used to verify tenant employment and income information during interim and annual reexaminations. Questioned costs: None. Context: See “Condition.” Cause: The issue appears to be due to inadequate internal controls, including lack of formalized procedures, insufficient staff training, and/or lack of supervisory review to ensure consistent use of the EIV system. Effect: Failure to utilize the EIV system constitutes noncompliance with federal regulations and HUD administrative guidance. The system provides independent, third-party income data that is critical for accurate verification. Without its use, Dallas County must rely more heavily on tenant self-certifications and third-party verifications, which may be incomplete or delayed. As a result, income may be either underreported or overreported, leading to inaccurate rent determinations. This can result in financial losses to the program or tenant grievances due to overcharges. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: Dallas County should strengthen internal controls to ensure full compliance with HUD requirements by utilizing the EIV system in all required reexaminations. Specifically, the County should: • Develop and implement formal policies mandating EIV use • Provide staff training on proper EIV procedures and discrepancy resolution • Establish supervisory review controls to ensure EIV reports are obtained, reviewed, and retained • Conduct periodic internal monitoring to ensure ongoing compliance Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan.

2025 – 004 Special Tests and Provisions: National Standards for the Physical Inspection of Real Estate (NSPIRE) / Housing Quality Standards Inspections Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program Title: Housing Voucher Cluster ALN: 14.871 14.879 Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) 2025 – 004 Special Tests and Provisions: National Standards for the Physical Inspection of Real Estate (NSPIRE) / Housing Quality Standards Inspections (Continued) Pass-Through Agency: N/A Pass-Through Number(s): N/A Award Period: October 1, 2024 – September 30, 2025 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), Dallas County must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it is managing the Federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). 24 CFR § 982.405(a) requires Dallas County to inspect each unit leased to a family prior to the commencement of the initial lease term to ensure the unit meets Housing Quality Standards (HQS). Additionally, the Dallas County Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCVP) Administrative Plan requires that inspections be conducted as promptly as possible, but no later than 15 business days after the unit’s ready date. 24 CFR § 982.405(b) requires Dallas County to inspect each unit at least biennially during the period of assisted occupancy to ensure the unit continues to meet HQS. Condition: Audit procedures included review of 40 rental unit inspections resulting in the following: • For one sampled unit, the initial inspection was not completed within 15 business days after the unit’s ready date. • For two sampled units, the most recent inspection performed during the fiscal year was not completed within two years of the previous inspection. Questioned costs: None. Context: See “Condition.” Cause: The delayed inspections were attributable to staffing shortages among housing inspectors, which created scheduling constraints. Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) 2025 – 004 Special Tests and Provisions: National Standards for the Physical Inspection of Real Estate (NSPIRE) / Housing Quality Standards Inspections (Continued) Effect: Late inspections that do not comply with 24 CFR § 982.405(a) and (b), as well as the Dallas County HCVP Administrative Plan, constitute noncompliance with HUD requirements governing HQS. Specifically, units may be occupied or remain under assistance without confirmation that they meet HQS, thereby increasing the risk that families reside in substandard or unsafe housing conditions. Additionally, Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) may be issued for units that have not been timely inspected or verified as compliant, resulting in potentially ineligible or improper payments. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: Dallas County should strengthen controls over the inspection process to ensure compliance with 24 CFR § 982.405(a) and (b) and the HCVP Administrative Plan. Specifically, Dallas County should: • Address staffing constraints by evaluating current inspector capacity and hiring additional qualified inspectors or utilizing contracted inspection services, as necessary, to meet required timeframes • Implement scheduling and tracking controls to monitor inspection due dates (initial and biennial) and ensure inspections are completed within required timeframes • Establish supervisory review procedures to regularly monitor inspection timeliness and follow up on overdue inspections • Develop or enhance written procedures requiring timely completion of inspections, including escalation protocols for delays • Perform periodic internal quality control reviews to verify compliance with HUD requirements and the Administrative Plan Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan.

2025 – 005 Special Tests and Provisions – HQS Enforcement Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program Title: Housing Voucher Cluster ALN: 14.871 14.879 Pass-Through Agency: N/A Pass-Through Number(s): N/A Award Period: October 1, 2024 – September 31, 2025 Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) 2025 – 005 Special Tests and Provisions – HQS Enforcement (Continued) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), Dallas County must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it is managing the Federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 24 CFR 982.405(d)(2), when a participant family or government official notifies Dallas County of a potential deficiency, the following conditions apply: Non-Life-Threatening. If the reported deficiency is non-life-threatening, Dallas County must, within 15 days of notification, both inspect the unit and notify the owner if the deficiency is confirmed. The owner must then make the repairs within 30 days of notification from Dallas County or within any approved extension. Condition: Audit procedures included a review of 40 inspections (failed). For 20 out of 40 selected, the owner of the rental unit failed to make the repairs within 30 days of notification from Dallas County. Questioned costs: None. Context: See “Condition.” Cause: Dallas County’s automated system appears to have limitations to flag upcoming or overdue repair deadlines which may result in missed enforcement actions or delayed responses by program staff. In addition, the County has been experiencing staff shortages among inspectors which is limiting Dallas County’s ability to timely track, verify, and enforce repair deadlines, leading to delays in ensuring compliance. Effect: As a result of system limitations and staffing shortages, Dallas County did not timely enforce repair deadlines, leading to noncompliance with federal HQS requirements, increased risk of potential payment of housing assistance for noncompliant units, increased risk to tenant health and safety, and weakened internal controls over program compliance. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: Dallas County should enhance its internal control processes by improving automated tracking of repair deadlines, strengthening enforcement procedures, addressing staffing limitations, and implementing supervisory review to ensure timely correction of HQS deficiencies and compliance with federal requirements. Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan.

Finding 2024-002: Reporting – Significant Deficiency in Controls over Compliance and Noncompliance ALN # 14.871 & 14.879 – Housing Voucher Cluster – Contract # TX559 – Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (“HCV Program”) Criteria – HUD-50058 forms must be submitted no later than 60 calendar days from the effective date of any action recorded on line 2b of the form HUD-50058, according to the guidance outlined in PIH 2011-65. Condition/Context – The HCV Program personnel complete physical and electronic HUD-50058 forms whenever reportable actions are undertaken by the Public Housing Authority (PHA). Out of a sample of 40 HUD-50058 forms, 40 hard-copy HUD-50058 forms were reviewed and approved by management, the corresponding electronic forms were not subjected to a secondary review to ensure that the coding matched the form. Of the 40 forms reviewed, one was not accepted within the prescribed reporting window. The electronic submission was ultimately rejected by the grantor for incorrect action coding. After this initial rejection, within the 60-calendar day window, the form was resubmitted electronically by Dallas County Health and Human Services (DCHHS), again without secondary review to ensure that the coding matched the hard-copy form. The form was rejected once more. Subsequently, another corrected HUD-50058 form was submitted electronically after the 60-calendar day due date and was finally accepted by the grantor. Cause - The HCV program did not have a control in place to compare all electronic HUD-50058 forms against the original related hard-copy form. Effect – Failure to perform proper review of electronic HUD-50058 forms could result in incorrect and untimely reporting to the grantor. Questioned Cost - None. Recommendations - HCV Program Management should review all electronic HUD-50058 forms prior to the submission to HUD to ensure the HUD-50058 electronic forms match the hard-copy forms completed by case managers. View of Responsible Officials - See Corrective Action Plan. New/Repeat Finding - New Finding

Equipment and Real Property Management – Significant Deficiency in Controls over Compliance and Noncompliance ALN #20.205 – Contract # 18-22XXIA001– Highway Planning and Construction Criteria – A physical inventory of the property purchased with grant funds must be performed and the results reconciled with the property records at least once every two years. Condition/Context - The grant program maintains 21 total pieces of equipment all of which are courtesy patrol vehicles used to carry out the purpose of the grant program. Grant management did not perform a complete physical inventory of all vehicles in service during the fiscal year; 13 of the 21 vehicles were improperly excluded from the Courtesy Patrol department on the Sheriff’s Department’s Annual Property Certification. Of the 13 vehicles, 9 were identified as improperly included in a separate department within the Certification and 4 were excluded entirely. Cause - Management did not maintain a proper control to ensure all courtesy patrol vehicles are included in the Annual Property Certification for the Sheriff's Department or reported within the correct department. Effect - Failure to perform a proper inventory control could lead to inaccurate and incomplete property records or a misappropriation of assets. Failure to properly track and report inventory could result in a loss of funding. Questioned Cost - None. Recommendations - Management should perform a complete inventory of all equipment maintained by the grant program. View of Responsible Officials - See Corrective Action Plan. New/Repeat Finding - New Finding

Reporting – Significant Deficiency in Controls over Compliance and Noncompliance ALN #93.686 – Contract #UT8HA33930 - HIV Emergency Relief Project Grants RW Supplement ALN #93.137 – Contract #CPIMP211284-01-0 - COVID-19 Minority Health Community Programs Criteria - Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition/Context - A total of $1,117,769 of costs was passed through to selected sub recipients during the year and the subawards were not reported in the FSRS. HIV Emergency Relief Project Grants RW Supplement Transactions Tested Subaward not reported Report not timely Subaward amount incorrect Subaward missing key elements There were a total of five subrecipients selected that had awards/expenditures greater than $30,000 that were not reported in the FSRS. Dollar amount of Tested Transactions Subaward not reported Report not timely Subaward amount incorrect Subaward missing key elements $1,030,818 $1,212,555 $1,212,555 $1,212,555 $1,212,555 COVID-19 Minority Health Community Programs Transactions Tested Subaward not reported Report not timely Subaward amount incorrect Subaward missing key elements There were two subrecipients that had awards/expenditures greater than $30,000 that were not reported in the FSRS. Dollar amount of Tested Transactions Subaward not reported Report not timely Subaward amount incorrect Subaward missing key elements $86,951 $99,300 $99,300 $99,300 $99,300 Cause - Grant Management was not aware of the subaward reporting requirement. Effect - Failure to report subaward data could potentially constitute an event of noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Questioned Cost - None. Recommendations - Management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data completely and accurately in the FSRS on a timely basis. View of Responsible Officials - See Corrective Action Plan. New/Repeat Finding – This finding is repeat from prior year’s finding #2022-004 ALN #14.218– Community Development Block/Entitlement Grants. Recommendations - Management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data completely and accurately in the FSRS on a timely basis. View of Responsible Officials - See Corrective Action Plan.

Finding 2022-02: Control and Compliance Finding ? Significant Deficiency Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ? Reporting ALN #21.027 ? Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF) Criteria ? As noted in the 2022 OMB Compliance Supplement and the grant agreements, Quarterly Project and Expenditure Reports are required to be submitted to the Treasury?s Office of Inspector General by grantees to report financial data, projects funded, expenditures, and contracts/subawards over $50,000. Condition/Context ? During the testing of the reporting compliance requirement for the CSLFRF program, we tested all four Project and Expenditure reports that were submitted to the grantor in fiscal year 2022 (one initial report and three quarterly reports). We noted that within each quarterly report, subsequent to the initial report submitted for the March 2021 ? December 2021 reporting period, the cumulative expenditures and obligations from the prior period report plus the current period expenditures and obligations reported did not mathematically agree to the cumulative expenditures and obligations on the report for that period. In addition to the mathematical differences found, the reported cumulative obligations following the initial report (Quarters 2, 3, and 4) did not agree to underlying support. Cause ? The grants administrators did not accurately report cumulative expenditures and obligations that occurred over the cumulation of the grant. There also was a lack of review by the grants audit to ensure accurate reporting. Effect ? Inaccurate reporting of expenditures and obligations of each project from report to report was communicated to the grantor. Inappropriate representation of expenditures and obligations on reporting may result in the early termination of the grant award or cessation of future funding. Questioned Cost ? None. Recommendations ? Management should ensure that they have a mechanism for tracking the reporting requirements and activity occurring in each reporting period. Management should also ensure all submitted reports are properly reviewed for all reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials ? See Corrective Action Plan.

Finding 2022-03: Special Tests ? Required Certifications and HUD Approvals and Environmental Reviews ? Significant Deficiency in Controls over Compliance and Noncompliance ALN #14.218? Community Development Block/Entitlement Grants (CDBG) Criteria ? CDBG funds (and local funds to be reimbursed with CDBG funds) cannot be obligated or expended before receipt of Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) approval of a Request for Release of Funds (RROF) and environmental certification, except for exempt activities under 24 CFR section 58.34 Projects must have an environmental review unless they meet criteria specified in the regulations that would exempt or exclude them from Request for Release of Funds (RROF) and environmental certification requirements (24 CFR sections 58.1, 58.22, 58.34, 58.35, and 570.604). Accordingly, the grantee should maintain documentation if any determination not to make an environmental review was made consistent with the criteria contained in 24 CFR sections 58.34 and 58.35(b). Condition/Context ? Per discussion with grant management, the documentation substantiating the exempt status of the environmental reviews were completed, however the documentation was lost due to unforeseen circumstances and was unavailable for observation during the audit process. Per our understanding of the projects and discussions with management, the projects are effectively exempt based on 24 CFR 58.34. However, the exempt status of the projects could not be verified because the documentation was not properly retained by the County. Cause ? During the year the grant management team had to relocate, and the physical documentation got misplaced during the process. The grant manager handling the documentation of the environmental reviews experienced technology issues which further caused a loss of information. Effect ? Failure to retain or backup documentation could potentially constitute an event of noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Questioned Cost ? None. Recommendations ? Management should ensure that they have a mechanism for storing and backing up documentation pertaining to environmental review. Views of Responsible Officials ? See Corrective Action Plan

Finding 2022-04: Special Test ? Reporting ? Significant Deficiency in Controls over Compliance and Noncompliance ALN #14.218? Community Development Block/Entitlement Grants Criteria ? Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act, direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition/Context ? A total of $2,497,138 was passed through to sub recipients during the year and the subawards were not reported in the FSRS. There was a total of seven subrecipients that had expenses greater than $30,000 that were not reported in the FSRS. Dollar amount of Tested Transactions $2,497,138 Subaward not reported $2,497,138 Report not timely $2,497,138 Subaward amount incorrect 0 Subaward missing key elements. $2,497,138 Cause ? Grant Management was not aware of the reporting requirement. Effect ? Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Questioned Cost ? None. Recommendations ? Management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS. Views of Responsible Officials ? See Corrective Action Plan.

2021-001 ALN 21.019 Coronavirus Relief Fund Reporting: Significant Deficiency in Controls and Non-Compliance with Grant Requirements (updated/repeated from 2020-003) Criteria?Per the grant requirements within the 2021 OMB Compliance Supplement, a quarterly Financial Progress Report is required to be submitted by prime recipients. As part of these requirements, the prime recipient?s quarterly Financial Progress Report submissions should be supported by the data in the prime recipient?s accounting system. This report includes expenditures incurred to date and known obligations for grant funds. Condition?For each of the four quarterly Financial Progress Report, expenditures incurred and obligations included within the report could not be reconciled to the County?s accounting records due to prior year unreconciled obligations and expenditures. Questioned Costs?N/A Context?We tested all of the quarterly reports, four total reports, related to our audit period and determined the expenditures incurred and obligations included within the report could not be reconciled to the County?s accounting records due to the carryover impact of prior year unreconciled obligations having a cumulative impact in fiscal year 2021. Management has refined the process for include expenditures and new obligations but cannot restate prior amounts included within the quarterly reports. Cause? The Financial Progress Reports did not appropriately reflect the County?s underlying accounting records and activity. This grant program and the reporting requirements were new for the County in fiscal year 2020 and the unreconciled obligations for the prior year led to the continued cumulative unreconciled obligations in fiscal year 2021 quarterly reports. Effect?All reported information should be reported accurately to the grantor and supported by accounting records to ensure the grantor is able to make decisions and track the grant spending and obligations appropriately. Recommendation?Implement further training and oversight of the reporting process to ensure each department involved is trained on what is required to support the information contained in reports submitted. Views of Responsible Officials?See Corrective Action Plan.

CFDA 21.019 Coronavirus Relief Fund Reporting: Significant Deficiency in Controls and Non-Compliance with Grant Requirements Criteria?Per the grant requirements within the OMB Compliance Supplement 2020 Addendum, a quarterly Financial Progress Report is required to be submitted by prime recipients beginning with the first report for the quarter ended June 30, 2020, which was due on September 21, 2020. As part of these requirements, the prime recipient?s quarterly Financial Progress Report submissions should be supported by the data in the prime recipient?s accounting system. This report includes expenditures incurred to date and known obligations for grant funds. Condition?For the June 30, 2020 quarterly Financial Progress Report, expenditures incurred were reconciled to the general ledger, however obligations included within the report could not be reconciled to the County?s accounting records. For the September 30, 2020 quarterly Financial Report, expenditures and obligations included within the report could not be reconciled to the County?s accounting records. Questioned Costs?N/A Context?We tested all of the quarterly reports, two total reports, related to our audit period and determined for the June 30, 2020 quarterly Financial Progress Report, expenditures incurred were reconciled to the general ledger, however obligations included within the report could not be reconciled to the County?s accounting records. For the September 30, 2020 quarterly Financial Report, expenditures and obligations included within the report could not be reconciled to the County?s accounting records. Cause? The Financial Progress Reports did not appropriately reflect the County?s underlying accounting records and activity. This grant program and the reporting requirements were new for the County in fiscal year 2020. Effect?All reported information should be reported accurately to the grantor and supported by accounting records to ensure the grantor is able to make decisions and track the grant spending and obligations appropriately. Recommendation?Implement further training and oversight of the reporting process to ensure each department involved is trained on what is required to support the information contained in reports submitted. Views of Responsible Officials?See Corrective Action Plan.

GSA_MIGRATION

GSA_MIGRATION