EIN: 956002833
UEI: HN6PNVJ8K8Y6
Data as of August 20, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on August 28, 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 February 28, 2023, which was (1269 days ago).
What is a management decision? →Program: COVID-19 Coronavirus Relief Fund CFDA No.: 21.019 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Treasury Passed-through: State of California Award No. and Year: 2020 Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Instance of Non-Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.403, Factors affecting allowability of costs, states that except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal Awards: not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federally financed program in either the current or a prior period. Condition: During our testing of the County?s compliance with the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, and Allowable Costs/Costs Principles compliance requirements, we noted that 2 out of 60 non-payroll program expenditure samples selected were also reported for reimbursement through other grants. Additionally, during our testing of the County?s compliance with the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, & Costs/Costs Principles compliance requirements, we noted the County Coronavirus Relief Fund program expenditures included $28,355,334 for salaries and employee benefits for presumptively substantially dedicated employees. Based on inquiry and review of the expenditure detail, we noted that 60 expenditures were also reported for reimbursement through other grants. In applying the criteria above, as the expenditures were already claimed through other grants, they would not be eligible to be covered under the Coronavirus Relief Fund. Cause: The condition was caused by the County Executive Office not verifying with the departments that expenditures claimed under the Coronavirus Relief Fund had not been claimed for reimbursement under other grants. Effect: Failure to follow the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, & Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements results in non-compliance with Federal regulations, and the control environment over the claiming process is weakened. Questioned Costs: For the 2 out of 60 non-payroll program expenditures claimed under both the Coronavirus Relief Fund and other grants, the known questioned costs totaled $357,423. For the 60 payroll program expenditures claimed under both the Coronavirus Relief Fund and other grants, the known questioned costs totaled $46,527. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 60 transactions were selected from the non-payroll program expenditures, which accounted for $2,192,522 of the total non-payroll population of $3,458,623. A nonstatistical sample of 60 payroll program expenditures, which accounted for $46,527 of the total presumptively substantially dedicated employee expenditure population of $28,355,334, were claimed under reimbursement under the Coronavirus Relief Fund and other grants. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County modify and strengthen its current policies and procedures to ensure that program expenditures are not claimed for reimbursement under multiple programs. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.
Program: COVID-19 Coronavirus Relief Fund CFDA No.: 21.019 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Treasury Passed-through: State of California Award No. and Year: 2020 Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Instance of Non-Compliance Questioned Costs: For the 2 out of 60 non-payroll program expenditures claimed under both the Coronavirus Relief Fund and other grants, the known questioned costs totaled $357,423. For the 60 payroll program expenditures claimed under both the Coronavirus Relief Fund and other grants, the known questioned costs totaled $46,527. Management?s or Department?s Response: The County incurred significant operational expense and response costs to protect the health and well-being of our community during the Coronavirus pandemic. In total, these cost impacts exceeded the amount of all federal/State funding made available to the County to address the pandemic. During the early stages of the pandemic, the federal Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) funding received through the State was applied to some costs which were subsequently funded from other federal funds made available to the County after the CRF eligibility period began. These costs were inadvertently not backed out from the County?s periodic spending reports to the State and were later identified as part of this Single Audit. This issue has been corrected and a revised final recap of the eligible expenses has been filed with the State Department of Finance. Contact Information of Responsible Official: Jeff Frapwell Assistant County Executive Officer County of Santa Barbara Executive Office 805-568-3432
Program: COVID-19 Coronavirus Relief Fund CFDA No.: 21.019 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Treasury Passed-through: State of California Award No. and Year: 2020 Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i), Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses, states that charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages records must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable and properly allocated. Condition: During our testing of the County?s compliance with the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, & Allowable Costs/Costs Principles compliance requirements, we noted that in 1 of 60 payroll program expenditure selected, the employee?s timecard was not approved by a supervisor. Cause: The County?s procedures did not consistently ensure that the review of timecards was documented. Effect: Lack of review for personnel hours could lead to unallowable activities and costs to be charged to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 60 totaling $132,894 out of $14,255,294 payroll program expenditures were selected for Activities Allowed or Unallowed, & Allowable Costs/Costs Principles payroll testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County modify and strengthen its current policies and procedures to ensure that all timecards consistently document evidence of supervisor approval. The procedures should also address the compensating controls for circumstances where obtaining a supervisor?s approval is not possible. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.
Program: COVID-19 Coronavirus Relief Fund CFDA No.: 21.019 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Treasury Passed-through: State of California Award No. and Year: 2020 Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Questioned Costs: $0 Management?s or Department?s Response: The County?s existing policies and procedures related to the approval of employee time reporting provide for the approval of the employee?s supervisor. Additionally, the payroll administrator for each department and the Auditor?s payroll division independently validate employee time reports for compliance with the County?s reporting rules. Based on this finding, the County will review our existing time reporting approval procedures and make any necessary modifications to adequately safeguard taxpayer resources. In addition, the County will address the compensating control for circumstances where obtaining the supervisor?s approval is not possible. Contact Information of Responsible Official: Jeff Frapwell Assistant County Executive Officer County of Santa Barbara Executive Office 805-568-3432
Program: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse CFDA No.: 93.959 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed-through: California Department of Health Care Services Award No. and Year: 12NNA42 and 14-90100 (2020) Compliance Requirements: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Instance of Non-Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.332(a), Requirements for Pass-Through Entities, states that all pass-through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the information at 2 CFR 200.332(a) at the time of the subaward and if any of those data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. Condition: During our testing of the County (Behavioral Wellness Department) policies and procedures over subrecipient monitoring, 1 out of 6 of the agreements with a subrecipient did not clearly identify the following information at the time of subaward: o CFDA number and name o Subrecipient?s unique entity identifier o Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN) o Federal award date Cause: The condition was caused by certain policies and procedures not being aligned with the requirements applicable to subrecipients in 2 CFR 200.332. Effect: The Behavioral Wellness Department did not identify the required elements of the subaward to the subrecipient at the time of subaward, increasing the risk of noncompliance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 6 out of 6 total subrecipients were selected for testing. The condition noted above was identified during our procedures over the Behavioral Wellness Department?s subrecipient monitoring provisions. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: Yes. Recommendation: We recommend that the County modify and/or strengthen its policies and procedures to ensure that all required award information is clearly communicated to subrecipients at the time of subaward in accordance with 2 CFR 200.332(a). Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.
Program: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse CFDA No.: 93.959 Federal Agency: United States Department of Health and Human Services Passed-Through: California Department of Health Care Services Award Number: 12NNA42 and 14-90100 Award Year: 2020 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Questioned Costs: $0 Management?s or Department?s Response: The County classified these providers as subrecipients in the FY 2020/21 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and disclosed the pass-through amounts. For subrecipients with multi-year agreements, federal award tables for FY 2020/21 and FY 2021/22 were added to the agreements to `clearly identify? the SAPT subaward as well as the elements required by 2 CFR 200.332 (a) (1) through (6). For subrecipients with contracts that expired on June 30, 2021, a federal award table was added to their new FY 2021/22 contracts only as it was not possible to amend the FY 2020/21 agreements prior to their expiration. Disclosure of federal grant terms will continue to be incorporated into the contracts as the information is received from State and Federal granting agencies. To ensure compliance with 2 CFR 200.332(f), the County has instituted a procedure to formally document the County?s collection of Single Audit reports and review of subrecipient compliance with this section. Providers will also be required to sign a certification form asserting compliance with 2 CFR 200.332(f). Contact Information of Responsible Official: Chris Ribeiro Chief Financial Officer Santa Barbara County Department of Behavioral Wellness 805-884-1694
2020-001
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on September 20, 2021. 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 20, 2022, which was (1614 days ago).
What is a management decision? →Program: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse CFDA No.: 93.959 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed-through: California Department of Health Care Services Award No. and Year: 12NNA42 and 14-90100 (2020) Compliance Requirements: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Instance of Non-Compliance Criteria: In accordance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 200.332, pass-through entities must comply with the following: ? 2 CFR 200.332(a) ? Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the information at 2 CFR 200.332(a)(1) through (6) at the time of the subaward and if any of those data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. ? 2 CFR 200.332(f) ? Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F-Audit Requirements when it is expected that the subrecipient?s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in 2 CFR 200.501 Audit Requirements. Condition: The following conditions were noted as a result of our testing of the County (Behavioral Wellness Department) policies and procedures over subrecipient monitoring: ? At the time of the audit, the County categorized all providers that receive Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse funding, as contractors. Upon further inquiry with management, it was noted that six subrecipients were identified and the subrecipient expenditures had not been reported on the schedule of expenditures of federal awards. ? The agreements with all subrecipients did not clearly identify the following information at the time of subaward: o CFDA number and name o Subrecipient?s unique entity identifier o Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN) o Federal award date The County asserts that this information was directly provided to the subrecipients by incorporating reference to the County?s federal award agreement with the State in the contracts with the providers. ? The County asserts that provider financial statements were reviewed and Single Audits obtained when applicable; however, sufficient evidence was not maintained to document this process. Cause: The condition was caused by the County categorizing all providers as contractors. The County performed certain monitoring procedures over the providers during the year. However, since the providers were not considered subrecipients, certain policies and procedures have not been aligned with the requirements applicable to subrecipients in 2 CFR 200.332. Effect: At the time of audit and subject to adjustments, the subrecipient expenditures on the schedule of expenditures of federal awards were misstated. Further, there is an increased risk that subrecipients may not properly account and report federal expenditures in accordance with the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context: Of the total federal expenditures incurred in the program, total expenditures to providers was $2,147,448, of which, management identified $796,667 being subrecipients. Recommendation: We recommend that the County modify and/or strengthen its policies and procedures to ensure that all required award information is clearly communicated to subrecipients at the time of subaward in accordance with 2 CFR 200.332(a) and that the verification of Single Audit Reports for subrecipients are adequately documented in accordance with 2 CFR 200.332(f). Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.
I. FINANCIAL STATEMENT FINDINGS None. II. FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS 2020-001 Program: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse CFDA No.: 93.959 Federal Agency: United States Department of Health and Human Services Passed-Through: California Department of Health Care Services Award Number: 12NNA42 and 14-90100 Award Year: 2020 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Questioned Costs: $0 Subrecipient Monitoring Management?s or Department?s Response: The County initially categorized six providers that received block grant funding as contractors rather than subrecipients. The classification of providers as subrecipients vs. contractors is the responsibility of the County as the pass-through agency. There are no specific checklists or flowcharts that lead to a definitive, final decision. Checklists and guidance can be used to assist in the classification but ultimately the decision is based on professional judgment. In this particular case, the County identified six providers as contractors using a checklist where the vast majority of responses indicated that these providers were contractors. The County relied on this checklist along with other qualitative aspects of the relationship to categorize the providers as contractors. The County was also audited annually by the State Department of Health Care Services and the classification was not identified as improper in these audits. The external audit firm did not concur with the County?s classification of these providers in their Single Audit. Upon further review, the County agrees that there are certain characteristics of the relationship that may shift the categorization towards a subrecipient rather than a contractor. Despite the County?s initial categorization of these providers as contractors, most of the federal award disclosures required by 2 CFR 200.332 were present in the contracts with the providers either by direct reference or by reference to the State?s agreement with the County. Despite most of the disclosures being referenced in the agreements, it is likely that they did not meet the standard of being ?clearly identifiable? as required by 2 CFR 200.332 as they were referenced sporadically throughout the document. Further, the County had subrecipient monitoring procedures in place for the providers that were reviewed. For this particular subset, the County conducted site visits, issued programmatic monitoring reports, reviewed provider financial statements, among other procedures. The County also consulted with the providers and concluded as to whether they were required to obtain Single Audits to comply with 2 CFR 200.332(f). This process primarily occurred during meetings with providers and was not documented to the level required by the external audit firm. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action: The County has reclassified these providers as subrecipients and the FY 2019/20 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards was updated to disclose the pass-through amounts. The County intends to amend the agreements with the subrecipients in FY 2021/22 to `clearly identify? the SAPT subaward as well as the elements required by 2 CFR 200.332 (a) (1) through (6). This will be accomplished by inclusion of a summary page within the agreement that makes direct reference to the required elements. To ensure compliance with 2 CFR 200.332(f), the County has instituted a procedure to formally document the County?s collection of Single Audit reports and review of subrecipient compliance with this section. Providers will also be required to sign a certification form asserting compliance with 2 CFR 200.332(f). Contact Information of Responsible Official: Chris Ribeiro Chief Financial Officer Santa Barbara County Department of Behavioral Wellness 805-884-1694
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on November 19, 2019. 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 May 19, 2020, which was (2284 days ago).
What is a management decision? →2019-001 Program: Medical Assistance Program (Medicaid) CFDA No.: 93.778 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed-Through: California Departments of Health Care Services, Mental Health, and Social Services Award Number: Santa Barbara Award Year: Fiscal Year 2018/19 Compliance Requirement: Eligibility Questioned Costs: $0 Criteria: The June 2019 Uniform Guidance Compliance Supplement requirements for eligibility state that the pass-through entity must determine whether required eligibility determinations were made, that individuals/group program participants were determined to be eligible, and that only eligible individuals or groups of individuals participated in the program, and determine whether federal program awards were made only to eligible participants. Condition Found: Out of the 40 case files selected for Medi-Cal eligibility test work, we noted the following: ? 1 case file whereby the County failed to perform a client reassessment of needs within the 12-month renewal period. ? 2 case files whereby the County failed to perform an Income Eligibility Verification System (IEVS) report during the redetermination process. Out of the 40 case files selected for In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) eligibility test work, we noted the following: ? 4 case files whereby the County failed to perform a client reassessment of needs within the 12-month renewal period. Effect: Participant data may not be accurate in the participant file or the system, which could lead to initial and continued eligibility errors and inaccurate benefit calculation. Cause: Reassessments are required to be completed within 12 months from the previous face to face visit. The department experienced staffing shortages during fiscal year 18/19. Repeat Finding: See prior year Finding 2018-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County adhere to established policies and procedures with regards to initial and ongoing eligibility determination, required documentation, and maintenance of participant file and ensure that such policies and procedures are formally documented and strictly adhered to by County personnel. This will help ensure the accuracy of the participant data and that eligibility determinations are supported by the proper documentation in the participant file. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: The County concurs. Refer to separate Corrective Action Plan Report for management?s responses.
2019-001 Program: Medical Assistance Program (Medicaid) CFDA No.: 93.778 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed-Through: California Departments of Health Care Services, Mental Health, and Social Services Award Number: Santa Barbara Award Year: Fiscal Year 2018/19 Compliance Requirement: Eligibility Questioned Costs: $0 Medical Eligibility Management?s or Department?s Response: As this report recognizes, the Department experienced layoffs in July 2017, which had a significant impact on operations, including the inability to re-hire behind positions that became vacant. Recently, the Department hired and filled vacant eligibility worker positions. The current induction class is expected to graduate from training at the end of November 2019. Plans are underway to recruit, hire, and train another eligibility induction class to commence mid-January 2020. We expect the additional resources will assist the Department in managing its vacancies and address the findings in this report. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action: The Department recognizes the importance of processing redeterminations in a timely manner and acknowledges that one redetermination was not completed within the mandated time frames. Staff will be reminded at the 10/9/2019 Medi-Cal Team Meeting that all efforts are to be made to process redeterminations within the mandated time frames as established in Administrative Directive 15-500, ?Medi-Cal Renewal Process and Change of Circumstance Redetermination.? The Department acknowledges that the IEVS report was not performed during two redeterminations. Staff will also be reminded at the 10/9/2019 Medi-Cal Team Meeting that all cases that do not electronically verify during the redetermination process will require a request and review of the IEVS report following established business process outlined in Administrative Directive 06-22, ?IEVS & SAVE Reports.? In addition to these timely reminders at the Medi-Cal Team Meeting, Eligibility Supervisors continue to address quality work through case reviews, unit meetings, and individual conferences. Eligibility Supervisors will continue to work closely with line staff and program support staff to identify existing barriers and develop necessary solutions to ensure timely, complete, and accurate eligibility determinations. Contact Information of Responsible Official: Maria Gardner Deputy Director Economic Assistance 805-346-8289 In Home Supportive Services Management?s or Department?s Response: As this report recognizes, the Department experienced significant layoffs in July 2017. The Adult Division sustained fiscal impacts in 2017 that resulted in layoffs, reassignment of IHSS staff to other areas of the department, and inability to re-hire behind positions that became vacant. This created significant workload increases, including additional travel for social workers out of their normal assigned regions, which directly resulted in inability to meet timeline outcomes consistently. We have since hired and filled vacancies and developed strategies for meeting reassessment timeframes in accordance with state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action: We expect the additional staffing resources mentioned above will assist the Department in addressing this finding. In addition, IHSS supervisors continue to address timely reassessments at countywide staff meetings as a standing item as well as evaluating individual performance expectations in their monthly meetings with staff and the IHSS manager. IHSS supervisors will continue to work closely with staff to identify existing barriers while strategizing alternative ways to address the gap in reassessments. Contact Information of Responsible Official: Amy Krueger Deputy Director Adult and Children Services 805-346-8351
2018-002
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on November 5, 2018. 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 May 5, 2019, which was (2664 days ago).
What is a management decision? →GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2017-001
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2017-003
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on November 20, 2017. 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 May 20, 2018, which was (3014 days ago).
What is a management decision? →GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-001
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-002
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-003
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on December 20, 2016. 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 20, 2017, which was (3348 days ago).
What is a management decision? →GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-002
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-001
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.