Subrecipient Monitoring CCIA Spring Conference Sheena Tran, Rancho Santiago CCD Tania Walden, Los Rios CCD Tracy Young, Coast CCD May 2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MONITORING OF SUBGRANTEES
Advertisements

Fiscal Monitoring: Ensuring Accountability of Your Sub-Grantees
The Governors Grants Office Presents: Smart Issues for Effective Grants Management Governors Grants Office Higher Education Conference May 22, 2012 Martin.
Contract Staff Training Contract Management 2007.
OMB Circular A133 Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations 1 Departmental Research Administrators Training Track.
Audit Requirements  A-133 Gov't, Education and Non-Profit  Thresholds $500K or more expended during the FY - Single Audit required  Audit Report - due.
OMB Circular A-133 Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-Profit Organizations CReATE May 2013 Cathi Bass, Grants Compliance Manager Sponsored Research.
4/28/2015 Presented by David McQuay, Jr., CPA 1 Non-Profit Financial Management Florida Non-profit Housing, Inc. Self-help Housing Conference.
New Uniform Guidance Combines the requirements of OMB Circulars A-21, A-87, A-110, A-122, A-89, A-102, A-133, and A-50 into a streamlined format. *NOTE:
Subrecipient Monitoring Webcast Presenters Pat O'Rourke, Irene St. Croix, Bridget Ware Department of Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services.
1 Subgrants vs. Subcontracts TAA-CCCT Grants November 16, 2011.
Subrecipient Monitoring OFFICE OF RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION 2010.
Subawards and Subrecipient Monitoring
Dionysios Karamalikis November 9,  Award Identification—At the time of the award, identifying to the sub-recipient the federal award information.
“The mission of the Sub-recipient Monitoring Section is to monitor, assess, and assist Sub-recipients to successfully implement and complete Grant Program.
Implementing the Uniform Guidance U.S. Department of Education.
Grants & Contracts Support Group December 10, 2008 Subrecipient and Vendor Determination Checklist.
Subrecipient Monitoring Under the New Uniform Guidance Steven A. Spillan, Esq. Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC Spring Forum 2015.
U.S. Department of Education The Uniform Guidance Audit Requirements – 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart F.
Audits of Federal Awards AGA-Olympia October 20, Brad White, SAO.
Subrecipient Monitoring: A-133 Single Audit Compliance Michigan State Police Emergency Management and Homeland Security Division Jackie Reese, Audit Unit.
A SOUND INVESTMENT IN SUCCESSFUL VR OUTCOMES FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT.
Not Your Father’s Single Audit Tammie Brown John Fisher U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.
Uniform Grant Guidance Laura Hirst Office of the Auditor General.
F EDERAL F UNDING A CCOUNTABILITY AND T RANSPARENCY A CT R EPORTING Utah Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget December 9, 2010.
2015 VOCA National Training Conference Grant Financial Management.
Erica Cummings Grant Coordinator 1.  The New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (DHSEM) is responsible for:  Monitoring.
Monitoring & Oversight Adult Education and Literacy (AEL) Programs Brenda B. Williams Project Manager Texas Workforce Commission Regulatory Integrity Division.
Omni Circular Key Area #7: New Responsibilities of the Pass- Through Agency By Michael Brustein, Esq. Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC Spring.
Presented by Raaj Kurapati and Charlene Hart. Introduction  The Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 was enacted to streamline and improve the effectiveness.
UT-Arlington Accounting CPE Day August 13, 2014 SEFA Preparation and Subrecipient Monitoring.
Subrecipient Monitoring Under the Office of Management and Budget’s Circular A-133 Presented to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation.
The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards The OMB SuperCircular Information for FTA Grantees.
BTOP OVERSIGHT WASHINGTON D.C. MAY 2012 U.S. DOC Inspector General Recovery Act Oversight Task Force 1.
HIGHWAY/UTILITY PROGRAM OVERVIEW ROADWAY CONFERENCE APRIL 20, 2009.
Risk and Subaward Management under the Uniform Guidance U.S. Department of Education.
SBIR Budgeting Leanne Robey Chief, Special Reviews Branch, NIH.
Subrecipient Monitoring and Common Findings By USDE Kristen Tosh Cowan, EsquireTiffany R. Winters, Esquire
Award Monitoring Update National Science Foundation Advisory Committee for Business and Operations October 22, 2003 Mary Santonastasso, Director, Division.
Brette Kaplan, Esq. Erin Auerbach, Esq. Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC Spring Forum 2013
Webinar for FY 2011 i3 Grantees February 9, 2012 Fiscal Oversight of i3 Grants Erin McHughJames Evans, CPA, CGFM, CGMA Office of Innovation and Improvement.
Audit and Audit Resolution Presented by Wendy Spivey ADECA Audit Manager.
Safeguarding Federal Funds OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Fundamentals of Grants Management SLARI Training Workshop.
“SPEAR” W ORKSHOP O CTOBER 19 & 30, 2015 ANGELLE GOMEZ S UBAWARD R ISK A SSESSMENT / MONITORING.
Agency Roundtable Discussion: Subrecipient Monitoring.
The New Super Circular Inaugural Tribal Accounting Conference November 16, 2015 Morgan Aronson National Single Audit Coordinator
UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM t Selection and Employment of Consultants Negotiations with Consultants; Monitoring Performance of Consultants; Resolving Disputes.
Sponsored Project Administration Fall 2012 CERTIFICATION PROGRAM Sponsored Project Lifecycle Introduction Overview Creating a Project Budget Compliance.
Jaimie Lewis Omnitrans San Bernardino, California SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING.
A risk assessment is the process of identifying potential hazards an organization may face and analyzing methods of response if exposure occurs.
What’s your friend up to? Subrecipient Monitoring Issues Tom Egan, MIT OSP Jeannette Gordon, Division of Grants Compliance and Oversight OPERA, OER, NIH.
Juanita Syljuberget Alabama Cooperative Extension System May 23, 2012.
FMCSA BASIC TITLE VI PROGRAM TRAINING December 2015 Lester G. Finkle FMCSA National Title VI Program Manager 11/13/20151.
WHY MONITOR? Compliance with applicable Federal requirements & performance goals are being achieved. Prevention of fraud & waste Early detection of inefficiencies.
Sub-recipient Monitoring and Contractor Determination
Subrecipient Monitoring
UNIFORM GUIDANCE: RESULTS AND BEST PRACTICES
Subaward - 2 CFR A formal legal agreement between your institution and another legal entity An award provided by a pass-through entity (PTE) to.
The Administration of Subrecipient Agreements
NCJA’s National Forum Financial Management Training
Uniform Guidance Discussion
TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT FORUM
Subaward Life Cycle 10/24/17.
The Importance of Subrecipient Monitoring
Subrecipient vs. Contractor Determinations
Subrecipient Monitoring
Grants Management 101 Part A
Time Studies/Time Tracking & What’s New(s)
Understanding a Subrecipient Agreement
Presentation transcript:

Subrecipient Monitoring CCIA Spring Conference Sheena Tran, Rancho Santiago CCD Tania Walden, Los Rios CCD Tracy Young, Coast CCD May 2013

Agenda Defining Subrecipients Regulatory Requirements Monitoring Importance of Relationships Proposed Grant Reform

Is every entity a subrecipient? No. There is a difference.

What is a Subrecipient? “Entity that expends…awards received from a pass-through entity to carry out a … program…A subrecipient relationship exists when funding from a pass through entity is provided to perform a portion of the scope of work or objectives of the pass through entity’s award agreement with the….awarding agency.” --OMB A-133 §___.105

What is a Vendor? “A dealer, distributor, merchant or other seller providing goods or services that are required for the conducts of a…program…for example, supplies, expendable materials, or data processing services in support of the project activities.” --OMB A-133 §___.105

What’s the Difference? Most important factor: substance rather than form The same organization may have different relationships with the pass through entity based upon the grant and/or contract terms An organization can be a recipient, subrecipient and a vendor in three different grant programs

What’s the Difference? cont The key difference between a subrecipient and a vendor is that subrecipient activities directly execute the mission, whereas vendors provide products or services that indirectly support the mission.

Determine Relationship ASAP Identify subrecipient relationships early. Early determination is important in the selection of the subrecipient, and whether the resulting agreement includes appropriate terms and conditions that comply with program requirement Responsibilities affect level of oversight required and impact a program’s integrity and overall success.

Subrecipient/Vendor Checklist Handout

Subrecipient Contracts Include clauses permitting the district and the funding agency the right to: – Perform subrecipient reviews – Request financial statements, and – Review the subrecipient agency’s records related to the grant.

So Why Do We Monitor Subrecipients? To ensure compliance with requirements described in OMB A-133 To verify good business practices are in place to ensure the authorized agency disburses federal funds in accordance with grant requirements.

Purpose of Review (from OMB A-133) Federal award information and compliance requirements identified to subrecipients Subrecipient activities are monitored. Subrecipient audit findings are resolved. The impact of subrecipient non-compliance is assessed. The subrecipient obtained the required audits and took appropriate corrective action on audit findings.

Best Practices Develop a monitoring plan – Written procedures defining scope and frequency – Include corrective action follow up Create a monitoring schedule Develop/implement a monitoring checklist Assess risk – i.e., determine factors for frequency and method of monitoring

Risk Assessment Identify appropriate risk indicators, assign a value or weight Evaluate and rank subrecipients and programs based on relative risk Identify available monitoring resources and staff – weigh against needs Adjust monitoring plan, including monitoring activities and schedule based on risk and resource assessments.

Risk Indicators Size of sub federal award portfolio Prior findings: A-133, federal program monitoring, grantee monitoring Program performance Change in program scope or activities Financial stability Complaints

Risk Assessment Evaluate subrecipients and programs against risk indicators Rank subrecipients and programs by risk Use data analysis and automation to make process more efficient (large number of subs) Perform analysis regularly to account for changes in risk.

Resource Assessment Determine amount and types of resources needed to monitor subs and programs Identify available resources – assign responsibility Address resource limitations

Monitoring Plan Reconcile between need and availability of resources Adjust monitoring schedule based on risks and available resources Schedule technical assistance based on identified risks.

Risk Indicators Program risk – Complexity – Percentage of program awards passed through recipient. – Dollar amount of award Subrecipient Risk – Dollar amount of award – New recipients – History of non-compliance – New personnel – New or substantially changed systems

Skit #1

Subrecipient Monitoring Audited financial statements Current organization chart – names and positions Completed Subrecipient Questionnaire (handout) Supporting documentation for Questionnaire Signed Management Certification Site visit (as needed)

Subrecipient Monitoring cont Based upon results of the documentation received and the risk assessment, additional work may be required, including but not limited to: – Interviews with key personnel – Follow up on audit findings – Testing of grant related transactions – Assessing compliance with grant and/or contract

Penalties/Sanctions If a subrecipient fails to submit requested information, funding may be withheld until information is received. Suggest including this verbiage in contract with subrecipient.

SKIT #2

Relationships Internal Auditor Communication and Relationships – handout What to do with an non-responsive sub Site visits – building the relationships Obstacles to compliance – Delays – No response – Finding the right contact person

SKIT 3

Proposed Grant Reform Section 501 Subrecipient Monitoring and Management is created to co-locate guidance on oversight of subawards that previously was located in different places in different OMB Circulars. To provide greater clarity into the expectations for subaward oversight across the Federal government. Section 502 Standards for Financial and Program Management and other minor language throughout the guidance is updated to align the objectives for performance monitoring and measurement with those described for Federal agencies in OMB Circular A-11.

Proposed Grant Reform - cont Section.501 Subrecipient Monitoring and Management explicitly requires pass-through entities to either honor the indirect cost rates negotiated at the Federal level, negotiate a rate in accordance with Federal guidelines, or provide the minimum flat rate. Aimed at ensuring that entities who receive Federal funds primarily indirectly nevertheless are appropriately reimbursed for the allowable costs associated with the award. Address questions about the required level of subrecipient oversight, OMB has consolidated and clarified relevant guidance on subrecipient monitoring requirements in section.501 Subrecipient Monitoring and Management.

Proposed Grant Reform - cont Subrecipient Monitoring—The pass-through entity – (1) Made sub-awards only to eligible entities, – (2) identified awards, compliance requirements, and payments to the subrecipient prior to disbursement, – (3) monitored subrecipient activities to ensure subrecipient compliance, and – (4) performed the audit resolution function (e.g., ensured proper audit submitted on time, followed up on audit findings, including issuance of a management decision, and ensuring that subrecipients took timely and appropriate corrective action) /reform-of-federal-policies-relating-to-grants-and- cooperative-agreements-cost-principles-and#h-43

Questions? Sheena Tran, CPA - Rancho Santiago CCD – (714) – Tania Walden, CIA, CBA, MBA - Los Rios CCD – (916) – Tracy Young, Coast CCD – (714) –