EIN: 846000732
UEI: FV56SRLGHGJ6
Audited by: Clifton Larson Allen LLP
Cognizant agency: 93 [Department of Health and Human Services]
View federal awards & risk assessment →
Data as of September 2, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on July 19, 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 January 19, 2027 (137 days from today).
What is a management decision? →FAC accepted this audit on July 16, 2025 — management decision was due January 16, 2026.
During our testing of 40 Foster Care IV-E benefit transactions, we noted one sample out of forty total samples where the individual receiving payment under Foster Care IV-E was not eligible as the individual did not meet the eligibility requirement of living with a parent or specified relative during the required timeframe. This individual received nine total payments during 2024 totaling $236,528. Questioned costs: $236,528. Context: The County is responsible for determining eligibility of individuals under the Foster Care IV-E program and then recording the beneficiary payment correctly within the Colorado Trails Welfare System (Trails). The Colorado Department of Human Services reimburses the County for foster care related costs through the Colorado Financial Management System (CFMS) based on the information entered into Trails. Noted that the County properly recorded these payments as ineligible for Foster Care IV-E based on the coding entered into Trails, however the Colorado Department of Human Resources improperly reimbursed the County using Foster Care IV-E funds for the ineligible individual. Cause: The Colorado Department of Human Services reimbursed the County using Foster Care IV-E funds for an individual that was not eligible under the program based on a translation issue between the Trails system and the Colorado Financial Management System (CFMS), both of which are managed by the Colorado Department of Human Services. Effect: Payment was reimbursed using Foster Care IV-E funds to an individual who was not eligible under the program. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the County collaborate with the Colorado Department of Human Services to ensure that reimbursements under Foster Care IV-E only occur for individuals that are eligible under the Foster Care IV-E Program. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria or specific requirement: 12 CCR 2509-7.601.71 provides eligibility requirement for the State of Colorado’s Foster Care IV-E program includes the requirement that for an individual to be considered Foster Care IV-E eligible, they must have been removed from a home where they were living with a parent, or a specified relative, either during the month court proceedings occurred or sometime within the six months preceding the month in which court proceedings took place. Condition: During our testing of 40 Foster Care IV-E benefit transactions, we noted one sample out of forty total samples where the individual receiving payment under Foster Care IV-E was not eligible as the individual did not meet the eligibility requirement of living with a parent or specified relative during the required timeframe. This individual received nine total payments during 2024 totaling $236,528. Questioned costs: $236,528. Context: The County is responsible for determining eligibility of individuals under the Foster Care IV-E program and then recording the beneficiary payment correctly within the Colorado Trails Welfare System (Trails). The Colorado Department of Human Services reimburses the County for foster care related costs through the Colorado Financial Management System (CFMS) based on the information entered into Trails. Noted that the County properly recorded these payments as ineligible for Foster Care IV-E based on the coding entered into Trails, however the Colorado Department of Human Resources improperly reimbursed the County using Foster Care IV-E funds for the ineligible individual. Cause: The Colorado Department of Human Services reimbursed the County using Foster Care IV-E funds for an individual that was not eligible under the program based on a translation issue between the Trails system and the Colorado Financial Management System (CFMS), both of which are managed by the Colorado Department of Human Services. Effect: Payment was reimbursed using Foster Care IV-E funds to an individual who was not eligible under the program. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the County collaborate with the Colorado Department of Human Services to ensure that reimbursements under Foster Care IV-E only occur for individuals that are eligible under the Foster Care IV-E Program. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Condition: During our testing of 40 Foster Care IV-E benefit transactions, we noted one sample out of forty total samples where the individual receiving payment under Foster Care IV-E was not eligible as the individual did not meet the eligibility requirement of living with a parent or specified relative during the required timeframe. Recommendation: We recommend the County collaborate with the Colorado Department of Human Services to ensure that reimbursements under Foster Care IV-E only occur for individuals that are eligible under the Foster Care IV-E Program. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to the finding: The Adams County Human Services (ADHS) finance staff will implement a monthly review comparing the IV-E status report in the ADHS Mango application to the monthly Discoverer payments report from the State of Colorado system. This monthly process should show IV-E payments made for clients who were flagged non-IV eligible. If errors are found, ADHS will send a list of the clients and payments in question to the state for their review and correction. ADHS finance staff will also verify that we have correctly entered the client eligibility determination in the state system. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Maurice Stenberg Planned completion date for corrective action plan: December 31, 2025
FAC accepted this audit on July 24, 2024 — management decision was due January 24, 2025.
During our testing of eight covered transactions (three vendors and five subawards), we noted all three vendors did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures for vendors. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the eight covered transactions tested did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures. Cause: These three vendors were selected by the participants of the program funded by this grant for training services. Since the County did not select these vendors for these services, the County did not have formal agreements with these vendors. Formal agreements would have led the County to collect the required certifications for suspension and debarment. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the County obtain certifications from vendors stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM, even if no formal agreement exists with a vendor. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID - 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: None identified Award Period: March 3, 2021 – December 31, 2024 Compliance Requirement: Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include procedures in place to ensure the required certifications for covered contracts and subawards are received, documented, and contracts are not made with a debarred or suspended party. Condition: During our testing of eight covered transactions (three vendors and five subawards), we noted all three vendors did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures for vendors. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the eight covered transactions tested did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures. Cause: These three vendors were selected by the participants of the program funded by this grant for training services. Since the County did not select these vendors for these services, the County did not have formal agreements with these vendors. Formal agreements would have led the County to collect the required certifications for suspension and debarment. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the County obtain certifications from vendors stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM, even if no formal agreement exists with a vendor. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
COVID - 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) Condition: During our testing of nine covered transactions (three vendors and six subawards), we noted all three vendors did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures for vendors. Recommendation: We recommend the County obtain certifications from vendors stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM, even if no formal agreement exists with a vendor. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Program will on a quarterly basis review all vendor expense and pull the suspension and debarment when the vendor is close to reaching $20,000 in expenses. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Laura Garcia Planned completion date for corrective action plan: December 31, 2024
FAC accepted this audit on July 20, 2023 — management decision was due January 20, 2024.
During testing over subrecipients monitoring and reporting, we noted the County did not have effective control over subrecipient monitoring and reporting. Questioned costs: None. Context: For 5 of 5 subrecipients selected, the County did not have agreements with the subrecipients that included the required federal award information and did not have a process in place to monitor these subrecipients. Prior to 2022, the County determined that certain entities receiving payment under TANF were contractors. In March of 2023, the County performed a revised analysis using the guidance in 2 CFR 200.331 with the conclusion that certain entities that were previously determined to be contractors should have been considered subrecipients. After this revised determination was made, the County did not provide revised subaward agreements or perform subrecipients monitoring procedures. Cause: The County initially improperly determined TANF subrecipients as contractors prior to 2022 and did not follow up timely after a revised determination was completed in 2023. The County did not have a process in place to properly assess if organizations met the criteria to be considered subrecipients. Effect: If the County does not provide required subaward information on a timely basis, it increases the risk that subrecipients will not be in compliance with all required federal award requirements. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the County determine whether an entity receiving payment under TANF is a subrecipient or a contractor prior to entering into an agreement with the entity and to include all guidance under 2 CFR 200.331 when making this determination. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit findings.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria or Specific Requirements: Using the guidance in 2 CFR section 200.331, non-Federal entities passing federal awards through to other entities are required to perform a determination as to whether the other entities are considered to be subrecipients or contractors. Under 2 CFR 200.332, pass-through entities are required to ensure that subawards to subrecipients include required federal award identification and detail of all compliance and other requirements for the federal award. In addition, the subrecipients to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, that compliance requirements are met, and that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on any deficiencies relating to the Federal award provided. Condition: During testing over subrecipients monitoring and reporting, we noted the County did not have effective control over subrecipient monitoring and reporting. Questioned costs: None. Context: For 5 of 5 subrecipients selected, the County did not have agreements with the subrecipients that included the required federal award information and did not have a process in place to monitor these subrecipients. Prior to 2022, the County determined that certain entities receiving payment under TANF were contractors. In March of 2023, the County performed a revised analysis using the guidance in 2 CFR 200.331 with the conclusion that certain entities that were previously determined to be contractors should have been considered subrecipients. After this revised determination was made, the County did not provide revised subaward agreements or perform subrecipients monitoring procedures. Cause: The County initially improperly determined TANF subrecipients as contractors prior to 2022 and did not follow up timely after a revised determination was completed in 2023. The County did not have a process in place to properly assess if organizations met the criteria to be considered subrecipients. Effect: If the County does not provide required subaward information on a timely basis, it increases the risk that subrecipients will not be in compliance with all required federal award requirements. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the County determine whether an entity receiving payment under TANF is a subrecipient or a contractor prior to entering into an agreement with the entity and to include all guidance under 2 CFR 200.331 when making this determination. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit findings.
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) ? Assistance Listing No. 93.558 Recommendation: We recommend the County determine whether an entity receiving payment under TANF is a subrecipient or a contractor prior to entering into an agreement with the entity and to include all guidance under 2 CFR 200.331 when making this determination. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Prior to the finding we have been working to properly classify entities that receive TANF fund as subrecipients versus contractors. We will continue to implement a process to analyze the entities that are receiving payments through TANF and make sure that we properly determine them as a subrecipient or a contractor. Once the determination is made, we will work with Legal and enter into the correct agreement with the entity. We will also perform the required monitoring for the TANF subrecipients. Name of the contact persons responsible for corrective action: Eddie Valdez ? Deputy Director, Candace Cadena ? Executive Strategist, Nick Beston ? Accounting Manager. Planned completion date for corrective action plan: July 1, 2024
During our testing over the County?s quality control process for TANF payments to program participants, we noted one instance where errors identified in the quality control review process were not addressed on a timely basis. Questioned costs: None Contest: for 1 of 40 quality control case reviews selected, the County did not take corrective action for certain errors relating to data recorded for participant identification and pregnancy status in a timely manner. For the exception noted, the case review was performed in May 2022 but corrective action for these errors was not taken until March 2023. We noted that the errors that were not corrected timely did not impact the eligibility determination for the case. Cause: The County did not have a process to ensure that errors identified in the quality control process were corrected in a timely manner. Effect: if errors detected during the quality control review process are not updated timely, it increases the risk that the County pay TANF benefits to an ineligible recipient or incorrectly withhold TANF benefits to an eligible recipient. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommended the County implement a process to ensure that errors identified in the quality control process are addressed in a timely manner. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria or specific requirements: Recipients of federal awards are required to establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award (2 CFR 200.303). Condition: During our testing over the County?s quality control process for TANF payments to program participants, we noted one instance where errors identified in the quality control review process were not addressed on a timely basis. Questioned costs: None Contest: for 1 of 40 quality control case reviews selected, the County did not take corrective action for certain errors relating to data recorded for participant identification and pregnancy status in a timely manner. For the exception noted, the case review was performed in May 2022 but corrective action for these errors was not taken until March 2023. We noted that the errors that were not corrected timely did not impact the eligibility determination for the case. Cause: The County did not have a process to ensure that errors identified in the quality control process were corrected in a timely manner. Effect: if errors detected during the quality control review process are not updated timely, it increases the risk that the County pay TANF benefits to an ineligible recipient or incorrectly withhold TANF benefits to an eligible recipient. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommended the County implement a process to ensure that errors identified in the quality control process are addressed in a timely manner. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) ? Assistance Listing No. 93.558 Recommendation: We recommend the County implement a process to ensure that errors identified in the TANF quality control review process are addressed in a timely manner. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: This is in isolated incident in our QA process. We have built a system with ticklers, and we missed this one. We will implement a secondary review by our QA supervisor to make sure all QA issues have been resolved in a timely manner. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: John McGraw ? Program Manager of Professional Standards Planned completion date for corrective action plan: July 1, 2024
FAC accepted this audit on September 27, 2022 — management decision was due March 27, 2023.
During our testing of internal control over eligibility for Foster Care, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. Questioned costs: None noted Context: The internal control process for Adams County is that supervisors meet with case managers every 90 days. The case workers then record the review date in Trails (Colorado?s statewide automatic child welfare information system) and include relevant case data (completeness, any open notes, etc). From a sample of forty cases, there were six instances within five cases where the ninety-day reviews were not being performed timely. Non-timely reviews ranged from 2 days to 6 months. Cause: Case workers are not entering documentation of ninety-day reviews into Trails in a timely manner. Effect: If cases are not reviewed timely, Adams County is at risk to pay foster care benefits to an ineligible recipient. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County document ninety-day reviews within Trails in a timely manner to provide an accurate audit trail. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria or specific requirement: Recipients of federal awards are required to establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award (2 CFR 200.303). Condition: During our testing of internal control over eligibility for Foster Care, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. Questioned costs: None noted Context: The internal control process for Adams County is that supervisors meet with case managers every 90 days. The case workers then record the review date in Trails (Colorado?s statewide automatic child welfare information system) and include relevant case data (completeness, any open notes, etc). From a sample of forty cases, there were six instances within five cases where the ninety-day reviews were not being performed timely. Non-timely reviews ranged from 2 days to 6 months. Cause: Case workers are not entering documentation of ninety-day reviews into Trails in a timely manner. Effect: If cases are not reviewed timely, Adams County is at risk to pay foster care benefits to an ineligible recipient. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County document ninety-day reviews within Trails in a timely manner to provide an accurate audit trail. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Foster Care Title IV-E ? Assistance Listing No. 93.658 Recommendation: We recommend that the County document ninety-day reviews within Trails in a timely manner to provide an accurate audit trail. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: CFS staff are all trained in how to complete a ninety-day review in Trails. We will work with supervisors and division leaders to implement a data driven supervision model that will ensure that these reviews are completed timely. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Tiffany Sewell Planned completion date for corrective action plan: December 31, 2022
During our testing of internal control over suspension and debarment for ERA, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. Questioned costs: None noted Context: When entering into a covered transaction with an entity, the County is required to verify that the entity is not suspended or debarred prior to entering into the transaction. In our sample of four cases, there were three instances where the County did not have evidence of verification the entity was not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. The County did provide evidence that the verification occurred subsequent to payment and prior to year-end. Cause: The County did not have adequate controls in place to prevent it from entering into covered transactions with entities that may be suspended or debarred. Effect: The County could inappropriately disburse program funds to an entity that is suspended or disbarred. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County utilize standard forms or templates to document verification that parties are not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction with a subrecipient. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria or specific requirement: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking SAM exclusions, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of internal control over suspension and debarment for ERA, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. Questioned costs: None noted Context: When entering into a covered transaction with an entity, the County is required to verify that the entity is not suspended or debarred prior to entering into the transaction. In our sample of four cases, there were three instances where the County did not have evidence of verification the entity was not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. The County did provide evidence that the verification occurred subsequent to payment and prior to year-end. Cause: The County did not have adequate controls in place to prevent it from entering into covered transactions with entities that may be suspended or debarred. Effect: The County could inappropriately disburse program funds to an entity that is suspended or disbarred. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County utilize standard forms or templates to document verification that parties are not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction with a subrecipient. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERA) ? Assistance Listing No. 21.023 Recommendation: We recommend that the County utilize standard forms or templates to document verification that parties are not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a transaction with a subrecipient. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: The County will create a standard subrecipient monitoring policy that will cover all County federal programs. Standard forms and templates will be included in the policy. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Tyra Litzau Planned completion date for corrective action plan: April 30, 2023
During our testing of internal control over subrecipient monitoring for CSLFRF, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. Questioned costs: None noted Context: When entering into an agreement with a subrecipient, the County is required to make the subrecipient aware of the award information and requirements imposed by laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements. In our testing of one subrecipient agreement, it was missing all the required subaward information. The County did provide evidence that an amended subaward was made subsequent to year-end that had all of the required subaward information. Cause: The County did not have adequate controls in place to ensure all required information is included in subrecipient agreements. Effect: The County?s subrecipient could be unaware the award is made with federal dollars and not fully understand the requirements that need to be met. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County have a review process of subrecipient agreements to ensure that all required information is included within the document. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria or specific requirement: All pass-through entities must: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) Federal award identification. (i) Subrecipient name (which must match the name associated with its unique entity identifier); (ii) Subrecipient's unique entity identifier; (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date (see the definition of Federal award date in ? 200.1 of this part) of award to the recipient by the Federal agency; (v) Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; (vi) Subaward Budget Period Start and End Date; (vii) Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient; (viii) Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity including the current financial obligation; (ix) Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity; (x) Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); (xi) Name of Federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the Pass-through entity; (xii) Assistance Listings number and Title; the pass-through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the Assistance Listings Number at time of disbursement; (xiii) Identification of whether the award is R&D; and (xiv) Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged) per ? 200.414. (2 CFR 200.332) Condition: During our testing of internal control over subrecipient monitoring for CSLFRF, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. Questioned costs: None noted Context: When entering into an agreement with a subrecipient, the County is required to make the subrecipient aware of the award information and requirements imposed by laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements. In our testing of one subrecipient agreement, it was missing all the required subaward information. The County did provide evidence that an amended subaward was made subsequent to year-end that had all of the required subaward information. Cause: The County did not have adequate controls in place to ensure all required information is included in subrecipient agreements. Effect: The County?s subrecipient could be unaware the award is made with federal dollars and not fully understand the requirements that need to be met. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County have a review process of subrecipient agreements to ensure that all required information is included within the document. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ? Assistance Listing No. 21.027 Recommendation: We recommend that the County have a review process of subrecipient agreements to ensure that all required information is included within the document. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding:. Subsequent to year end, the County modified the subaward to include the required information and ensured it was part of all future CSLFRF agreements. In addition, the County will create a standard subrecipient monitoring policy that will cover all programs, and will include standard forms and templates. This policy will require a secondary review that will confirm all required documentation has been provided to subrecipients. Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Tyra Litzau Planned completion date for corrective action plan: April 30, 2023
FAC accepted this audit on July 14, 2021 — management decision was due January 14, 2022.
During our testing of internal control over eligibility for CCDF, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. Questioned costs: None noted Context: The internal control process for Adams County is to perform a review of case files each month in order to ensure compliance over eligibility cases which were processed. In our sample of eight cases tested, we noted four reviews in which the control identified errors, yet the errors were not subsequently fixed timely. Cause: The County did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the control corrected any issues identified. Effect: The County could identify corrective actions that are not subsequently implemented. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County continues to emphasize maintaining proper internal controls as it relates to federal awards. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria or specific requirement: Recipients of federal awards are required to establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award (2 CFR 200.303). Condition: During our testing of internal control over eligibility for CCDF, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. Questioned costs: None noted Context: The internal control process for Adams County is to perform a review of case files each month in order to ensure compliance over eligibility cases which were processed. In our sample of eight cases tested, we noted four reviews in which the control identified errors, yet the errors were not subsequently fixed timely. Cause: The County did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the control corrected any issues identified. Effect: The County could identify corrective actions that are not subsequently implemented. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County continues to emphasize maintaining proper internal controls as it relates to federal awards. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Recommendation: We recommend that the County continues to emphasize maintaining proper internal controls as it relates to federal awards. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: In researching and reviewing Adams County internal controls over compliance we have ascertained that one week was not sufficient time to complete a case review due to the high-volume workload in the past fiscal year for all Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) team members. In addition, there is a need for a written policy and procedure. These findings have reinforced the importance of prioritizing timely completion of the case review process on behalf of both parties (the reviewer and the reviewee) as well as the need for improved communication within the department to maintain effective internal controls. To mitigate against future issues, the following steps will be taken: 1. The Child Care Assistance Program Lead/Trainer/Supervisor will pull a weekly report of all overdue case reviews that are still pending action. 2. The Child Care Assistance Program Lead/Trainer/Supervisor will notify team members identified on the report and their CCAP supervisor that action is required and must be completed within 3 business days. 3. If the required action is not taken after 3 business days (whether by the individual directly, their CCAP supervisor, or another delegated team member), a second request will be sent and will need to be completed within the next business day. 4. The Child Care Assistance Program Lead/Trainer/Supervisor will establish a validation process to re-review a random sample of 2 closed reviews each month to ensure cited errors were correctly identified, reviewer comments were clear, and required corrections were completed as indicated. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Sue Bozinovski, Deputy Director, Economic Security and Aging Services; Carol Johnson, Specialty Programs Administrator; Julianna Nelson, Child Care Assistance Program Eligibility Supervisor; Paloma Garcia, Child Care Assistance Program Eligibility Lead; Kaylee Luna, Child Care Assistance Program Trainer. Planned completion date for corrective action plan: Implementation of this plan will begin 6/1/2021 and the steps identified above will continue an ongoing basis. If there are any questions regarding this plan, please call Sue Bozinovski at (720) 523-2151, Carol Johnson at (720) 523-2156, Julianna Nelson at (720) 523-2225, Paloma Garcia at (720) 523-2209, or Kaylee Luna at (720) 523-2203.
FAC accepted this audit on July 16, 2020 — management decision was due January 16, 2021.
During our testing of internal control over eligibility for TANF, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. The county was not in compliance with federal requirements over internal controls. Questioned costs: None noted Context: The internal control process for Adams County is to perform a review of at least four case files per month per caseworker in order to ensure compliance over eligibility cases which were processed. In our sample of forty cases tested, we noted two reviews in which the control identified errors, yet the errors were not subsequently fixed. Cause: The County did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the control corrected any issues identified. Effect: The County was not in compliance with regulations over federal awards as it relates to proper internal controls over compliance. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County continues to emphasize maintaining proper internal controls as it relates to federal awards. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2019 ? 001 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal program title: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) CFDA Number: 93.558 Pass-Through Agency: Colorado Department of Human Services Pass-Through Number(s): OM-OPSO-2018-0004 Award Period: July 1, 2018 ? June 30, 2019; July 1, 2019 ? June 30, 2020 Compliance Requirement: Eligibility Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Recipients of federal awards are required to establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award (2 CFR 200.303). Condition: During our testing of internal control over eligibility for TANF, we noted the County did not have effective control over compliance. The county was not in compliance with federal requirements over internal controls. Questioned costs: None noted Context: The internal control process for Adams County is to perform a review of at least four case files per month per caseworker in order to ensure compliance over eligibility cases which were processed. In our sample of forty cases tested, we noted two reviews in which the control identified errors, yet the errors were not subsequently fixed. Cause: The County did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the control corrected any issues identified. Effect: The County was not in compliance with regulations over federal awards as it relates to proper internal controls over compliance. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the County continues to emphasize maintaining proper internal controls as it relates to federal awards. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Adams County respectfully submits the following corrective action plan for the year December 31, 2019. Audit period: 2019 The findings from the schedule of findings and questioned costs are discussed below. The findings are numbered consistently with the numbers assigned in the schedule. FINDINGS?FEDERAL AWARD PROGRAMS AUDITS Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services State Department/Agency: Colorado Department of Human Services (CDHS) 2019-001 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ? CFDA No. 93.558 Recommendation: We recommend that the County continues to emphasize maintaining proper internal controls as it relates to federal awards. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: In researching the discrepant case reviews cited in the audit, we determined that there were extenuating circumstances that prevented timely completion of the required corrections by the individual being reviewed. Both discrepant reviews occurred during the month of 7/2019 for a team member who left on extended leave shortly after the reviews were conducted. The reviews remained in a pending status awaiting the team member?s return. When the team member did subsequently return to the office, additional changes had been made to the case based on both the customer?s report of new information as well as interfaced data fed directly into the eligibility system by the primary source. This complicated the nature of the required case review corrections and lent itself to confusion on the part of the individual being reviewed and the original reviewer. These findings have reinforced the importance of prioritizing timely completion of the case review process on behalf of both parties (the reviewer and the reviewee) as well as the need for improved communication within the department to be made aware of staffing changes. To mitigate against future issues, the following steps will be taken: 1.) The QA/Training Supervisors will pull a weekly report of all overdue case reviews that are still pending action. 2.) The QA/Training Supervisors will notify team members identified on the report and their direct supervisors that action is required and must be completed within 3 business days. 3.) If the required action is not taken after 3 business days (whether by the individual directly, their supervisor, or another delegated team member), a second request will be sent and the appropriate manager will be included. 4.) The QA/Training Supervisors will establish a validation process for case reviewers to re-review a random sample of 2 closed reviews per reviewer each month to ensure cited errors were correctly identified, reviewer comments were clear, and required corrections were completed as indicated. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Sue Bozinovski, Deputy Director, Economic Security and Aging Services; Dennette Burns, Community Support Services Division Manager; Karen Dyke, Quality Assurance/Training Supervisor; Michele King, Quality Assurance/Training Supervisor Planned completion date for corrective action plan: Implementation of this plan will begin 6/1/2020 and the steps identified above will continue on an ongoing basis. If there are has questions regarding this plan, please call Sue Bozinovski at (720) 523-2151, Dennette Burns at (720) 523-2255, or Karen Dyke at (720) 523-2224.
FAC accepted this audit on June 24, 2019 — management decision was due December 24, 2019.
FAC accepted this audit on June 11, 2018 — management decision was due December 11, 2018.
FAC accepted this audit on July 10, 2017 — management decision was due January 10, 2018.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴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 Colorado →
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →Add it to a monitored group and get alerted when a new audit, finding, repeat finding, or management-decision deadline shows up — instead of checking back.
Checking several at once? Portfolio view →
© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.
