EIN: 770274423
UEI: MNXXC4NVUEA5
Data as of August 20, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on December 18, 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 June 18, 2026, which was (64 days ago).
What is a management decision? →2024-001 - Late Submission of the Single Audit - (Significant Deficiency) Condition: The SF-SAC Single Audit Data Collection Form for the year ended June 30, 2024 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the required deadline by the Agency. Criteria: Per Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200, the single audit reporting package and the data collection form (SF- SAC) must be submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse within 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor's report(s), or 9 months after the end of the audit period, whichever comes first. Establish controls to reduce risk of late submission of the single audit report. Cause: Management did not have a single audit conducted within the required period indicated above. Effect: The single audit report was not submitted by the required deadline. Auditor's Recommendation: The Agency should finalize financial statements and send them to auditors for audit within a reasonable amount of time after year end. Management's Response: Management acknowledges the finding and concurs with the auditor’s recommendation. The delay in conducting the single audit and submitting the SF-SAC Data Collection Form was due to significant timing challenges driven by an extraordinary hardship: the complete turnover of the agency’s fiscal team during the audit period. This resulted in the loss of seasoned staff with deep institutional knowledge of complex WIOA fund accounting requirements, including the blending and braiding of more than 25 distinct funding sources—each with separate rules, timelines, and compliance obligations. Despite hiring experienced accounting professionals and bringing in expert support from other Workforce Development Boards, it was not feasible to finalize the financial statements and complete the audit within the original deadline. The agency has since been granted an extension by the EDD Compliance Review Office. In response, the agency has begun strengthening internal controls, establishing more detailed fiscal procedures, and implementing cross-training protocols to ensure continuity of financial reporting. These improvements are designed to protect the organization from future disruptions and ensure that Single Audit reporting packages and required data collection forms will be submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse within required timelines moving forward. The Agency has since taken steps to strengthen internal controls over the financial reporting and audit process. Management is committed to ensuring that future single audit reporting packages and data collection forms are submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse within the required deadlines. Estimated Completion Date: March 31, 2026 Responsible Party: Dale L. Stone Controller, Mother Lode Job Training
Late Submission of the Single Audit - (Significant Deficiency) Management's Response: Management acknowledges the finding and concurs with the auditor’s recommendation. The delay in conducting the single audit and submitting the SF-SAC Data Collection Form was due to significant timing challenges driven by an extraordinary hardship: the complete turnover of the agency’s fiscal team during the audit period. This resulted in the loss of seasoned staff with deep institutional knowledge of complex WIOA fund accounting requirements, including the blending and braiding of more than 25 distinct funding sources—each with separate rules, timelines, and compliance obligations. Despite hiring experienced accounting professionals and bringing in expert support from other Workforce Development Boards, it was not feasible to finalize the financial statements and complete the audit within the original deadline. The agency has since been granted an extension by the EDD Compliance Review Office. In response, the agency has begun strengthening internal controls, establishing more detailed fiscal procedures, and implementing cross-training protocols to ensure continuity of financial reporting. These improvements are designed to protect the organization from future disruptions and ensure that Single Audit reporting packages and required data collection forms will be submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse within required timelines moving forward. The Agency has since taken steps to strengthen internal controls over the financial reporting and audit process. Management is committed to ensuring that future single audit reporting packages and data collection forms are submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse within the required deadlines. Estimated Completion Date: March 31, 2026 Responsible Party: Dale L. Stone Controller, Mother Lode Job Training
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on March 22, 2020. 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 September 22, 2020, which was (2159 days ago).
What is a management decision? →Finding 2019-001 - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles (Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance) Criteria - In accordance with Part 200 of the Uniform Guidance, ?200.323(b) and (d) Contract Cost and Price, a non-Federal entity must negotiate profit as a separate element of the price for each contract in which there is no price competition and in all cases where cost analysis is performed. In addition, the cost plus a percentage of cost method of contracting must not be used. Condition- The contract between the Agency and the Foundation for California Community Colleges (Foundation) uses an unallowable cost plus a percentage of cost methodology to determine payment. Questioned Costs - $2,772 of known questioned costs. Context - A sample of 25 general disbursements totaling $31,777 was selected from a population of $866,327. Two instances were noted of disbursements to the Foundation, totaling $21,254, that included expenditures calculated using a cost plus a percentage of cost method that were billed and paid to the Foundation and reimbursed to the Agency. Effect - Expenditures not allowable to the major program were paid to the Foundation and reimbursed to the Agency. Cause - The control in place to review the procurement of contracts to be expended to grant awards failed in execution. Recommendation - We recommend management perform a more thorough review of contracts prior to procurement to determine that all provisions within the contract are in accordance with Federal regulations. "Management's Response - Management of the Agency disagrees with this finding for the following reasons: 1. The definition of a cost plus a percentage contract is "an agreement to reimburse a company for expenses plus a specific amount of profit, usually stated as a percentage of the contract's full price." There is no profit in the employer-of-record contract between the Agency and the Foundation. The contract does not qualify as a cost plus a percentage contract. 2. According to 2 CFR Part 200, indirect rates are allowable costs. 3. The Foundation's indirect cost rate determination of 19.05% exceeds the agreed upon 15% fee. 4. Many other local workforce areas utilize, and have utilized for many years, this same type of contract with the Foundation and have never received a finding. Additionally, the California Workforce Association recently announced that they will be utilizing the Foundation and this same type of contract for operating a new apprenticeship program. Due to these reasons, along with tacit assurances from members of the state board that this will not be a finding, management has good reason to believe that this finding will be dropped."
To Whom It May Concern, As required by the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States and Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), we have provided below our response and corrective action plan addressing the findings in the Report of Independent Auditors on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and Other Matters based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards and the Report of Independent Auditors on Compliance for the Major Federal Program and Report on Internal Control Over Compliance Required by the Uniform Guidance for the year ended June 30, 2019. Response and Corrective Action Plan Finding No. 2019-001 Allowable Costs/Cost Principles (Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance) Cause: The contract between MLC and the Foundation for California Community Colleges (Foundation) uses an unnecessary, unreasonable, and unallowable cost plus a percentage of cost methodology to determine payment. Management Response: Management of the Agency disagrees with this finding for the following reasons: 1. The definition of a cost plus a percentage contract is "an agreement to reimburse a company for expenses plus a specific amount of profit, usually stated as a percentage of the contract's full price." There is no profit in the employer-of-record contract between the Agency and the Foundation. The contract does not qualify as a cost plus a percentage contract. 2. According to 2 CFR Part 200, indirect rates are allowable costs. 3. The Foundation's indirect cost rate determination of 19.05% exceeds the agreed upon 15% fee. 4. Many other local workforce areas utilize, and have utilized for many years, this same type of contract with the Foundation and have never received a finding. Additionally, the California Workforce Association recently announced that they will be utilizing the Foundation and this same type of contract for operating a new apprenticeship program. Due to these reasons, along with tacit assurances from members of the state board that this will not be a finding, management has good reason to believe that this finding will be dropped.
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.
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →Monitor subrecipient audit findings and compliance status.
Start monitoring →Single Audit Intelligence is an independent tool powered by Federal Audit Clearinghouse data. Not affiliated with GSA, OMB, or any federal agency.