EIN: 946000519
UEI: LQ3ZFWP1TLR8
Audited by: CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP
Cognizant agency: 93 [Department of Health and Human Services]
View federal awards & risk assessment →
Data as of August 31, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on February 12, 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 August 12, 2026 (21 days ago).
What is a management decision? →The County did not perform required on-site inspections of four out of six HOME-assisted properties evaluated during FY 2025 as mandated by 24 CFR §§ 92.209(i), 92.251(f), and 92.504(d). These inspections are required every one to three years, depending on the number of units per project. Questioned costs: None Context: CLA reviewed the County’s inspection report and noted that four out of six overdue inspections were identified but not completed during the fiscal year. Cause: Staff turnover within the department impacted the ability to complete inspections as scheduled. Effect: Four out of six evaluated inspections due in Fiscal Year 2025 were not performed, resulting in noncompliance with HUD requirements and increased risk of undetected property standard deficiencies. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: Establish and maintain a formal inspection schedule with assigned accountability to ensure timely completion of all required HOME inspections. Implement tracking tools and cross-training to mitigate delays caused by staff turnover. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Federal agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal program title: Home Investments Partnerships Program Assistance Listing Number: 14.239 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: M24-UC060206 - FY25 Award Period: July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance Criteria: As required at 24 CFR §§ 92.209(i), 92.251(f), and 92.504(d), the County must perform onsite inspections to determine compliance with property standards and verify the information submitted by the owners every 1-3 years depending on number of units per project. Condition: The County did not perform required on-site inspections of four out of six HOME-assisted properties evaluated during FY 2025 as mandated by 24 CFR §§ 92.209(i), 92.251(f), and 92.504(d). These inspections are required every one to three years, depending on the number of units per project. Questioned costs: None Context: CLA reviewed the County’s inspection report and noted that four out of six overdue inspections were identified but not completed during the fiscal year. Cause: Staff turnover within the department impacted the ability to complete inspections as scheduled. Effect: Four out of six evaluated inspections due in Fiscal Year 2025 were not performed, resulting in noncompliance with HUD requirements and increased risk of undetected property standard deficiencies. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: Establish and maintain a formal inspection schedule with assigned accountability to ensure timely completion of all required HOME inspections. Implement tracking tools and cross-training to mitigate delays caused by staff turnover. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Condition: The County did not perform required on-site inspections of four out of six HOME-assisted properties evaluated during FY 2025, as mandated by 24 CFR §§ 92.209(i), 92.251(f), and 92.504(d). These inspections are required every one to three years, depending on the number of units per project. Recommendation: Establish and maintain a formal inspection schedule with assigned accountability to ensure timely completion of all required HOME inspections. Implement tracking tools and cross-training to mitigate delays caused by staff turnover. Explanation of Disagreement with Audit Finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action Planned in Response to Finding The County agrees with the finding and is implementing the following corrective actions to strengthen internal controls over HOME inspection compliance and ensure inspections are conducted in accordance with federal requirements. 1. Cross-Training of Inspection Staff Housing & Grants staff will conduct formal cross-training with inspectors from Environmental Health and/or the Marin Housing Authority by June 30, 2026. This training will cover HOME inspection requirements, including property standards, documentation expectations, and inspection frequency requirements. Cross-training will ensure sufficient technical expertise and backup coverage to perform and review HOME inspections in compliance with federal regulations and to maintain continuity during staffing changes.2. Implementation of Inspection Tracking Software The Community Development Agency will implement and utilize inspection tracking software by June 30, 2026 to track, schedule, and document HOME program inspections. The system will maintain inspection dates, inspection type (desk audit or physical), findings, corrective actions, and follow-up status. This tool will strengthen monitoring controls, provide management visibility, and help ensure inspections are conducted timely and consistently. 3. Conducting HOME Inspections in Accordance with HOME Regulations Housing & Grants staff will conduct HOME inspections in accordance with HOME program regulations by June 30, 2026, including both desk audits and physical inspections, as follows: • Desk Audits: Staff will review program documentation, tenant eligibility, income certifications, rent limits, and other compliance documentation using standardized desk audit procedures. • Physical Inspections: Physical property inspections will be performed in accordance with HOME property standards to assess health and safety compliance. • Monitoring and Documentation through JotForm Desk Audits: Desk audits will be documented using JotForm inspection and monitoring tools to ensure consistent documentation, clear audit trails, and management oversight of HOME compliance activities. 4. Formal Inspection Schedule and Ongoing Oversight The Community Development Agency has initiated development of a comprehensive HOME on-site inspection schedule that identifies all HOME-assisted properties, applicable inspection frequencies, and assigned staff responsibilities. The schedule will be maintained and reviewed at least quarterly by program management to ensure inspections are completed timely and any overdue inspections are promptly addressed. Responsible Officials • Leelee Thomas, Deputy Director, Community Development Agency Leelee.Thomas@marincounty.gov • Chris Miranda, Senior Program Coordinator, Community Development Agency Chris.Miranda@marincounty.gov Planned Completion Date All corrective actions described above are expected to be fully implemented by June 30, 2026.
FAC accepted this audit on January 24, 2025 — management decision was due July 24, 2025.
FAC accepted this audit on March 13, 2024 — management decision was due September 13, 2024.
FAC accepted this audit on February 2, 2023 — management decision was due August 2, 2023.
FAC accepted this audit on April 25, 2022 — management decision was due October 25, 2022.
Disbursement of benefits under the program were made to individuals that were not eligible for benefits. The program manager assisted in approving these fraudulent applications. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $1,780,325. Context: Grantees must obtain, if available, a current lease, signed by the applicant and the landlord or sublessor that identifies the unit where the applicant resides and establishes the rental payment amount. If a household does not have a signed lease, documentation of residence may include evidence of paying utilities for the residential unit, an attestation by a landlord who can be identified as the verified owner or management agent of the unit, or other reasonable documentation as determined by the grantee. In the absence of a signed lease, evidence of the amount of a rental payment may include bank statements, check stubs, or other documentation that reasonably establishes a pattern of paying rent, a written attestation by a landlord who can be verified as the legitimate owner or management agent of the unit, or other reasonable documentation as defined by the grantee in its policies and procedures. This documentation was falsified. Cause: When the program was set up at the County it was done quickly and as a result proper segregation of duties in accordance with County policy was not established. This allowed the program manager to receive applications, review applications and approve applications with no additional oversight. This created the opportunity for the program manager to assist in committing this fraud. Effect: As a result, benefit payments were approved to individuals that were not eligible to receive these benefits in the amount of $1.7 million. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2021 ? 003 Federal agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Federal program title: COVID-19 Emergency Rental Assistance Program Assistance Listing Number: 21.023 Pass-Through Agency: N/A Pass-Through Number(s): N/A Award Period: July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance Criteria: To be eligible, a household must be obligated to pay rent on a residential dwelling and the grantee must determine that: 1) one or more individuals within the household has qualified for unemployment benefits or experienced a reduction in household income, incurred significant costs, or experienced other financial hardship due, directly or indirectly, to the COVID-19 outbreak; 2) one or more individuals within the household can demonstrate a risk of experiencing homelessness or housing instability; and 3) the household has a household income at or below 80% of area median income. Condition: Disbursement of benefits under the program were made to individuals that were not eligible for benefits. The program manager assisted in approving these fraudulent applications. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $1,780,325. Context: Grantees must obtain, if available, a current lease, signed by the applicant and the landlord or sublessor that identifies the unit where the applicant resides and establishes the rental payment amount. If a household does not have a signed lease, documentation of residence may include evidence of paying utilities for the residential unit, an attestation by a landlord who can be identified as the verified owner or management agent of the unit, or other reasonable documentation as determined by the grantee. In the absence of a signed lease, evidence of the amount of a rental payment may include bank statements, check stubs, or other documentation that reasonably establishes a pattern of paying rent, a written attestation by a landlord who can be verified as the legitimate owner or management agent of the unit, or other reasonable documentation as defined by the grantee in its policies and procedures. This documentation was falsified. Cause: When the program was set up at the County it was done quickly and as a result proper segregation of duties in accordance with County policy was not established. This allowed the program manager to receive applications, review applications and approve applications with no additional oversight. This created the opportunity for the program manager to assist in committing this fraud. Effect: As a result, benefit payments were approved to individuals that were not eligible to receive these benefits in the amount of $1.7 million. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding.
COVID-19 Emergency Rental Assistance Program ? CFDA No. 21.023 Recommendation: When establishing a new program, the County should have policies in place to ensure that a proper internal control structure in accordance with County policy is established before the program is given the authority to proceed with accepting applications for benefits. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Prior to establishing a new program, corresponding policies and procedures will be reviewed for sufficiency in establishing and maintaining an internal control framework that provides reasonable assurance of compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of relevant federal awards. To ensure that the finding does not reoccur, we performed an internal review of the processes for the Emergency Rental Assistance program. We reviewed the roles and functions of the processor, reviewer, and approver to ensure adequate segregation of duties for adequate internal controls. We implemented alternative controls to compensate for lack of segregation. We conducted anti-fraud training to build strong professional knowledge and practical skills to help develop, implement and further the Emergency Rental Assistance compliance program. The program has also implemented background checks for all staff who have access to the financial system. Additionally, for questioned and unallowable costs, we have begun the process of recovering payments. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Hyacinth Hinojosa Planned completion date for corrective action plan: June 30, 2022
FAC accepted this audit on March 24, 2021 — management decision was due September 24, 2021.
FAC accepted this audit on February 4, 2021 — management decision was due August 4, 2021.
During our testing of compliance over the earmarking requirements for the Youth Activity program, we noted that the Alliance had not met the 20% earmarking requirement for this program. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Criteria: Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to the local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences?. Context: The condition noted above was identified during our procedures related to matching, level of effort and earmarking. Effect: The Alliance has not complied with the specific requirements related to the Youth Activities program as described in the Compliance Supplement for WIOA. Due to not meeting the earmarking requirement, future funding may be reduced. Cause: The Alliance was unable to find and place participants in paid or unpaid work experiences. Recommendation: CLA recommends that the Alliance identify opportunities for placing youth participants in paid or unpaid work experiences to be in compliance with the requirements of the program. Management Response: Workforce Alliance of the North Bay (WANB) subcontracts direct services out to local community organizations that provide direct services to clients. Our contracting language and budgets have been revised to earmark the funds to match the requirements in Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 that states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to the local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences?. For example, an allocation of $100,000 that allocates $90,000 to a contract would require $20,000 to be spent on paid and unpaid work experiences and those funds would not be reimbursed unless those earmarking requirements are met. Service providers must also submit a corrective action plan to WANB when they fail to meet these requirements. Furthermore, a provider who misses these requirements multiple times will receive a lower score or be ineligible to apply when the services are up for a new Request For Proposal (RFP) process.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-002 Program: Workforce Investment Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster CFDA No. 17.258, 17.259, and 17.278 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-Through Agency: State Employment and Training Administration Award Year: FY 2018-2019 Compliance Requirement : Earmarking Type of Finding: ? Significant Deficiency in internal control over earmarking requirements and an Other Matter Condition: During our testing of compliance over the earmarking requirements for the Youth Activity program, we noted that the Alliance had not met the 20% earmarking requirement for this program. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Criteria: Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to the local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences?. Context: The condition noted above was identified during our procedures related to matching, level of effort and earmarking. Effect: The Alliance has not complied with the specific requirements related to the Youth Activities program as described in the Compliance Supplement for WIOA. Due to not meeting the earmarking requirement, future funding may be reduced. Cause: The Alliance was unable to find and place participants in paid or unpaid work experiences. Recommendation: CLA recommends that the Alliance identify opportunities for placing youth participants in paid or unpaid work experiences to be in compliance with the requirements of the program. Management Response: Workforce Alliance of the North Bay (WANB) subcontracts direct services out to local community organizations that provide direct services to clients. Our contracting language and budgets have been revised to earmark the funds to match the requirements in Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 that states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to the local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences?. For example, an allocation of $100,000 that allocates $90,000 to a contract would require $20,000 to be spent on paid and unpaid work experiences and those funds would not be reimbursed unless those earmarking requirements are met. Service providers must also submit a corrective action plan to WANB when they fail to meet these requirements. Furthermore, a provider who misses these requirements multiple times will receive a lower score or be ineligible to apply when the services are up for a new Request For Proposal (RFP) process.
U.S. Department of Labor 2019-002 Workforce Investment Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster ? 17.258, 17.259, and 17.278 Recommendation: CLA recommends that the Alliance identify opportunities for placing youth participants in paid or unpaid work experience to be in compliance with the requirements of the program. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Workforce Alliance of the North Bay (WANB) subcontracts direct services out to local community organizations that provide direct services to clients. Our contracting language and budgets have been revised to earmark the funds to match the requirements in Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 that states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences.? For example, an allocation of $100,000 that allocates $90,000 to a contract would require $20,000 to be spent on paid and unpaid work experiences and those funds would not be reimbursed unless those earmarking requirements are met. Service providers must also submit a corrective action plan to WANB when they fail to meet these requirements. Furthermore, a provider who misses these requirements multiple times will receive a lower score or be ineligible to apply when the services are up for a new Request For Proposal (RFP) process. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Taylor Swain Planned completion date for corrective action plan: 12/31/21 If there are any questions regarding this plan, please call Taylor Swain at 707-699-1951.
FAC accepted this audit on January 27, 2020 — management decision was due July 27, 2020.
During our testing of compliance over the earmarking requirements for the Youth Activity program, we noted that the Alliance had not met the 20% earmarking requirement for this program. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Criteria: Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to the local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences?. Context: The condition noted above was identified during our procedures related to matching, level of effort and earmarking. Effect: The Alliance has not complied with the specific requirements related to the Youth Activities program as described in the Compliance Supplement for WIOA. Due to not meeting the earmarking requirement, future funding may be reduced. Cause: The Alliance was unable to find and place participants in paid or unpaid work experiences. Recommendation: CLA recommends that the Alliance identify opportunities for placing youth participants in paid or unpaid work experiences to be in compliance with the requirements of the program. Management Response: Workforce Alliance of the North Bay (WANB) subcontracts direct services out to local community organizations that provide direct services to clients. Our contracting language and budgets have been revised to earmark the funds to match the requirements in Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 that states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to the local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences?. For example, an allocation of $100,000 that allocates $90,000 to a contract would require $20,000 to be spent on paid and unpaid work experiences and those funds would not be reimbursed unless those earmarking requirements are met. Service providers must also submit a corrective action plan to WANB when they fail to meet these requirements. Furthermore, a provider who misses these requirements multiple times will receive a lower score or be ineligible to apply when the services are up for a new Request For Proposal (RFP) process.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-002 Program: Workforce Investment Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster CFDA No. 17.258, 17.259, and 17.278 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-Through Agency: State Employment and Training Administration Award Year: FY 2018-2019 Compliance Requirement : Earmarking Type of Finding: ? Significant Deficiency in internal control over earmarking requirements and an Other Matter Condition: During our testing of compliance over the earmarking requirements for the Youth Activity program, we noted that the Alliance had not met the 20% earmarking requirement for this program. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Criteria: Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to the local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences?. Context: The condition noted above was identified during our procedures related to matching, level of effort and earmarking. Effect: The Alliance has not complied with the specific requirements related to the Youth Activities program as described in the Compliance Supplement for WIOA. Due to not meeting the earmarking requirement, future funding may be reduced. Cause: The Alliance was unable to find and place participants in paid or unpaid work experiences. Recommendation: CLA recommends that the Alliance identify opportunities for placing youth participants in paid or unpaid work experiences to be in compliance with the requirements of the program. Management Response: Workforce Alliance of the North Bay (WANB) subcontracts direct services out to local community organizations that provide direct services to clients. Our contracting language and budgets have been revised to earmark the funds to match the requirements in Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 that states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to the local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences?. For example, an allocation of $100,000 that allocates $90,000 to a contract would require $20,000 to be spent on paid and unpaid work experiences and those funds would not be reimbursed unless those earmarking requirements are met. Service providers must also submit a corrective action plan to WANB when they fail to meet these requirements. Furthermore, a provider who misses these requirements multiple times will receive a lower score or be ineligible to apply when the services are up for a new Request For Proposal (RFP) process.
U.S. Department of Labor 2019-002 Workforce Investment Opportunity Act (WIOA) Cluster ? 17.258, 17.259, and 17.278 Recommendation: CLA recommends that the Alliance identify opportunities for placing youth participants in paid or unpaid work experience to be in compliance with the requirements of the program. Explanation of disagreement with audit finding: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. Action taken in response to finding: Workforce Alliance of the North Bay (WANB) subcontracts direct services out to local community organizations that provide direct services to clients. Our contracting language and budgets have been revised to earmark the funds to match the requirements in Section 129(c)(4), WIOA, 128 Stat. 1510 that states ?Not less than 20 percent of Youth Activity funds allocated to local area, except for the local area expenditures for administration, must be used to provide paid and unpaid work experiences.? For example, an allocation of $100,000 that allocates $90,000 to a contract would require $20,000 to be spent on paid and unpaid work experiences and those funds would not be reimbursed unless those earmarking requirements are met. Service providers must also submit a corrective action plan to WANB when they fail to meet these requirements. Furthermore, a provider who misses these requirements multiple times will receive a lower score or be ineligible to apply when the services are up for a new Request For Proposal (RFP) process. Name(s) of the contact person(s) responsible for corrective action: Taylor Swain Planned completion date for corrective action plan: 12/31/21 If there are any questions regarding this plan, please call Taylor Swain at 707-699-1951.
FAC accepted this audit on January 27, 2019 — management decision was due July 27, 2019.
FAC accepted this audit on February 6, 2018 — management decision was due August 6, 2018.
FAC accepted this audit on March 29, 2018 — management decision was due September 29, 2018.
FAC accepted this audit on March 8, 2017 — management decision was due September 8, 2017.
Data source: This information comes from the Federal Audit Clearinghouse, the official repository of Single Audit data. All data is public domain. Verify this organization's audit history at fac.gov.
Browse other Single Audit organizations in California →
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.
