10 Program, Fiscal Monitoring, and Audit, 2605(b)(10) - Assurance 10

10.1. How do you ensure good fiscal accounting and tracking of funds? The Division of Social Services uses a system of checks and balances to ensure accurate fiscal accounting and tracking. The LIHEAP/EAP Program Manager develops and maintains spreadsheets to track obligations and expenditures against the federal fiscal year, which are regularly reconciled with the Accounting Unit's fiscal records utilizing the State fiscal year. Funds are disbursed by the State Controller, with proper disbursal of and accounting for funds monitored through the Integrated Financial System (IFS). This system records and reports all aspects of financial activity within the program. 10.1a Provide your definitions of the following: Obligation Amount of funds committed by September 30th to be expended on or before the expenditure timeframe. Expenditures Funds paid out/spent for the program during expenditure timeframe. Expenditure timeframe Forty-five (45) days after the end of the grant period unless extension is agreed upon by the Division Chief Financial Officer in writing. Administrative costs Expenses incurred in support of the daily operations for the program. Audit Process 10.2. Is your LIHEAP program audited annually under the Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A - 133? Yes No 10.2a - if yes, describe your auditor selection process. Single Audit – As a recipient of federal funds, the Division is subject to Single Audits. These audits are conducted annually by an independent vendor contracted through the State’s Controller’s Office. Not all programs are reviewed each year. The LIHEAP Program was audited in FY 2023, and FY 2024 – awaiting findings. 10.3. Describe any audit findings of the grant recipient (i.e. State/Tribe/Territory) rising to the level of material weakness or reportable condition cited in the single audits, inspector general reviews, or other government agency reviews from the most recently audited fiscal year. No Findings Finding Type Brief Summary Resolved? Action Taken 1 other Type--Eligibility The amount of assistance to provide was not calculated with accurate information. Action Taken Supervisory case reviews will be in compliance ongoing. Yes training changes 2 other Type--Eligibility Supervisory case reviews were not performed in accordance with the State Plan. Action Taken The Division has filled the supervisor vacancies. Yes staffing/management changes The projected unobligated balance for CARES Act funds did not agree to the actual unobligated balance. Action Taken Two CARES act drawdowns that were incorrectly coded in the 425 Report. When they were identified they were corrected 3 reporting Yes training changes and reported to ACF in subsequent reports. 4 other Type--Documentation Supporting documentation was not maintained by the Division for amounts provided by subrecipients. Action Taken The Division has a new system tracking that allows for subgrantees to upload documents and track all required criteria. Completed January 2022 Yes training changes 5 reporting Required subaward information was not reported in the FFATA Subaward Reporting System. Action Taken The Division has established procedures to ensure all subawards are entered into the FFATA system. Completed August 2022. Yes staffing/management changes 6 monitoring Subawards did not contain all the required information, the subrecipients were not monitored to ensure audits required by Uniform Guidance were performed. Action Taken The Division has established monitoring procedures for federal and state award are met. Completed June 2022. Yes procedure/policy changes 10.4. Audits of Local Administering Agencies What types of annual audit requirements do you have in place for local administering agencies/district offices? Select all that apply. Local agencies/district offices are required to have an annual audit in compliance with Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A-133 Local agencies/district offices are required to have an annual audit (other than A-133) Local agencies/district offices' A-133 or other independent audits are reviewed by Grant recipient as part of compliance process. Grant recipient conducts fiscal and program monitoring of local agencies/district offices Local agencies and district offices are required to have an annual audit in compliance with Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A-133 Compliance Monitoring 10.5. Describe your monitoring process for compliance at each level below. Check all that apply. Grant recipients have a policy in place for appropriate separation of duties and internal controls. Internal program review Departmental oversight Secondary review of invoices and payments Other program review mechanisms are in place. Describe: A fully automated computer system determines eligibility and benefits. The Program Manager receives computer generated activity reports by case workers, including each case received and the date, each case processed and the date, status of each case, and any amount of benefits issued (delineated by source of revenue; i.e., LIHEAP, Rate-Payer Funded Universal Energy Charge (UEC), or any other available revenue). Files are selected for review to ensure compliance with all applicable regulations and procedures and to ensure accurate and expedient processing. The computer generates a pay record to the State’s Integrated Financial System (IFS) where checks are disbursed. Pay records are verified by the Accounting Unit as well as the LIHEAP/EAP Program Manager and Program Officer, prior to disbursement, which further ensures accuracy and reduces potential fraud and abuse. The Housing Division inspects a minimum of 10% for which weatherization assistance is provided. All Sub-grantees receiving Weatherization Assistance Program funding are monitored annually. See Nevada's Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) Monitoring Process for the Department of Energy (DOE) Compliance Local Administering Agencies/District Offices: On - site evaluation Annual program review Monitoring through central database Desk reviews Client File Testing/Sampling Other program review mechanisms are in place. Describe: 10.6 Explain, or attach a copy of your local agency monitoring schedule and protocol. Annual Program Evaluation - Nevada Revised Statute requires the Division to contract with an independent auditor for a comprehensive annual evaluation of the Energy Assistance Program to include statutory compliance, performance measurements, information technology support, business operations, effectiveness, efficiency, and the identification of any benefit and program deficiencies with recommendations to improve them. Annual evaluations are provided to the governor, the legislative commission, and members of the legislative interim finance committee. Annual Management Evaluations - Case reviews are conducted by administrative office program staff to ensure district offices are complying with established program policy and to evaluate the accuracy of benefit calculation/distribution. The review data is entered, compiled, and stored in a system application, which produces summary reports. Any review element which falls below a 95% compliance rate is subject to a corrective action plan involving the Deputy of Field Services, the Program Manager, Chief of Employment and Support Services and Program Staff. A subsequent targeted review is conducted to determine if the corrective action was sufficient to bring the office into compliance or if additional corrective action is required. Staff Performance Case Reviews – Supervisors/trainers are required to complete a set number of case reviews per worker per month to monitor staff performance. Trainees and staff with performance issues are subject to 100% review prior to the posting of benefits. The Program Manager reviews a subset of the review completed by the supervisors to ensure they are adequately identifying and addressing performance issues. Staff who fail to meet performance standards are subject to progressive disciplinary procedures. Single Audit - As a recipient of federal funds, the Division is subject to Single Audits. These audits are conducted annually by an independent vendor contracted through the State's Controller's Office. Not all programs are reviewed each year. We were audited last year, FY24, we are waiting for the outcome. All Weatherization Sub-grantees are selected for monitoring every year and ten percent (10%) of individual weatherization projects are randomly selected for monitoring by the Nevada Housing Division inspector. 10.7. Describe how you select local agencies for monitoring reviews. Attach a risk assessment if subrecipients are utilized. Site Visits: Nevada Housing Division staff conducts on-site file and office reviews once a year. Ten percent (10%) of files are examined to verify client eligibility. Sub-grantees and contractors' insurance, licenses and other certifications are reviewed at this time. Desk Reviews: All Sub-grantees must submit monthly fiscal and building weatherization reports for desk review of completed projects. 10.8. How often is each local agency monitored? Please attach a monitoring schedule if one has been developed. Annually 10.9. How many local agencies are currently on corrective action plans? 0 If any of the above questions require further explanation or clarification that could not be made in the fields provided, attach a document with said explanation here.