EIN: 942789696
UEI: GSA_MIGRATION
Audit also covers 2 related EINs: 264826604, 940760193 · unlinked EINs have no separate FAC filing
Audited by: MOSS ADAMS 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 September 29, 2022. 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 March 29, 2023 (1249 days ago).
What is a management decision? →Criteria: The Organization should have appropriate internal controls in place to ensure that reporting requirements are met and amounts utilized in reports are calculated accurately and in accordance with 45 CFR 75.342. Condition and Context: The Period 1 Provider Relief Fund (PRF) report submitted during the year ended December 31, 2021 was tested. The Organization elected to use Lost Revenues Option 2 Budgeted Revenue to report lost revenue based on quarterly actuals vs. budget, however, the budgets used to have been approved before March 27, 2020. The 2021 calendar year budget was not approved until after that date. Cause: PRF guidance was not thoroughly reviewed and researched. Effect: There was no impact to total funding received or retained by the Organization due to the error. The Organization?s lost revenue as calculated for the first 2 quarters of 2020 generated more than sufficient lost revenue to justify the total funding received by the entire Organization as reported on the Schedule of Expenditures for Federal Awards (?SEFA?). As such, the total amount of funding recognized on the basis of lost revenue for period 1 was accurate and the amount reported per the SEFA was also accurate. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: Policies and procedures over federal grant reporting should be modified to ensure reports are prepared using complete and accurate information. Review controls should be in place by someone other than the preparer of the report to ensure information is accurate prior to submission of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Criteria: The Organization should have appropriate internal controls in place to ensure that reporting requirements are met and amounts utilized in reports are calculated accurately and in accordance with 45 CFR 75.342. Condition and Context: The Period 1 Provider Relief Fund (PRF) report submitted during the year ended December 31, 2021 was tested. The Organization elected to use Lost Revenues Option 2 Budgeted Revenue to report lost revenue based on quarterly actuals vs. budget, however, the budgets used to have been approved before March 27, 2020. The 2021 calendar year budget was not approved until after that date. Cause: PRF guidance was not thoroughly reviewed and researched. Effect: There was no impact to total funding received or retained by the Organization due to the error. The Organization?s lost revenue as calculated for the first 2 quarters of 2020 generated more than sufficient lost revenue to justify the total funding received by the entire Organization as reported on the Schedule of Expenditures for Federal Awards (?SEFA?). As such, the total amount of funding recognized on the basis of lost revenue for period 1 was accurate and the amount reported per the SEFA was also accurate. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: Policies and procedures over federal grant reporting should be modified to ensure reports are prepared using complete and accurate information. Review controls should be in place by someone other than the preparer of the report to ensure information is accurate prior to submission of the report.
Management?s Response and Corrective Actions: The Organization attempted to correct the error in the Period 3 reporting but was unable to reopen the Phase 1 submitted file within the reporting portal. As such, the Organization will correct the lost revenue submission option to reflect option #3 entitled ?Alternate Reasonable Methodology? at the first opportunity. Despite the error in reporting, there was no impact to total funding received or retained due to the reporting error. Additionally, management will strengthen the review process for attestations with dual review to ensure full understanding of the reporting requirements.
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 filing records.
Start monitoring →© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.