RAPE CRISIS CENTER OF COLLIN COUNTY INC

Finding 2025-001: Allowable costs – Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Crime Victim Assistance ALN 16.575 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance requires that costs be adequately documented. The Organization’s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees’ timesheets and hours agree to the payroll register and to the amount allocated to grant activities. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 1 of the 25 payroll transactions tested, the fringe benefits were charged to the grant twice. Cause: An error in reporting the employee’s payroll expenses for the period caused a portion of the fringe benefits to be included twice. Effect: Employee payroll expenses charged to the grant were overstated. Questioned costs: None. Recommendation: Requests for reimbursement should be reviewed in detail to ensure all payroll costs are properly supported by time sheets and that the expenses are allocated correctly. Management’s response: See corrective action plan.

Finding 2024‐001: Allowable costs – Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Crime Victim Assistance ALN 16.575 Criteria: Uniform Guidance requires all cost be adequately documented and supported. Any changes to amounts previously charged to the grant should be corrected and updated timely. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, 2 out of the 38 samples tested included charges that were either unsupported or refunded back to the Organization and not corrected to return those funds to the grantor. Cause: Due to oversight, management of the Organization missed that these additional amounts were charged to the grant. Effect: Costs were charged to the grant that were unsupported or no longer existed. Recommendation: Management should implement controls to ensure that all charges to the grant are supported and that any changes to previous amounts charged are updated timely. Questioned costs: None Management’s Response: See corrective action plan. Finding 2024-002: Allowable costs – Material weakness over

Finding 2024-002: Allowable costs – Material weakness over internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Crime Victim Assistance ALN 16.575 Criteria: Section 200 of the Code of Federal Regulations requires recipients to have a cost allocation plan in place for allocated costs that is consistently followed and supported. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, 19 out of 38 samples were not 100% charged to the grant and/or were not supported by a cost allocation plan for how the percentages charged to the grant were determined. This is a repeat finding due to the timing of when the previous single audit took place and corrective action was not implemented until after this fiscal year. Cause: Turnover in the Organization and lack of knowledge of allocated cost requirements. Recommendation: In order to comply with the Uniform Guidance federal regulations, we recommend a cost allocation methodology be updated so that is easy to follow and consistently applied throughout the year. In addition, support of all calculations should be kept on file to document how the allocation was determined. Management’s response: See corrective action plan.

Finding 2024-003: Allowable costs – Significant deficiency over internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Crime Victim Assistance ALN 16.575 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance requires that costs be adequately documented. The Organization’s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees’ timesheets and hours agree to the payroll register and to the amount allocated to grant activities. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 3 of the 25 payroll transactions tested, the time and effort charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. The amount of time that was charged to the grant was greater than what was approved to be charged to the grant per the employee’s timesheet hours and grant budget allocations, and additional fringe benefits were charged that were not consistent with the other charges to the grant. Cause: For one sample, this was due to additional funds being available under the grant so, the amount charged was increased to use up remaining funds. For another sample, the employee was paid additional hours and fringe benefits that were not documented on the employee’s timesheet, and due to oversight, the timesheet was not updated to reflect these additional hours. For the third sample, additional fringe benefits were charged for this employee that were not charged for the other employees. Effect: Employee payroll was not accurately allocated to the grant based on actual time and effort. Questioned costs: None. Recommendation: Hours worked towards the grant on the approved timesheet should be used to determine how much of the employee’s time is charged to the grant. If changes are made, they need to be documented and supported for how the change reflects the employee’s time and effort towards the grant program. Requests for reimbursement should reviewed in detail to ensure all payroll costs are properly supported by time sheets. In addition, any fringe benefits charged to the grant should be documented and consistently charged. Management’s response: See corrective action plan.

Finding 2023‐001: Allowable costs – Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance. Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 21.027. Criteria: Section 200 of the Code of Federal Regulations requires recipients to implement robust internal controls to ensure compliance with cost principles for all transactions charged to the grant. The Organization’s control policies state that all credit card charges are to be reviewed by management prior to the monthly statement being paid. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, 4 out of the 25 samples tested did not have documented approval from management of the charges on the credit card statement prior to payment. Cause:  Due  to  oversight,  management  of  the  Organization  missed  approving  charges  on  two  credit card statements during the year. Effect: The Organization’s reporting of allowable costs is not fully documented in accordance with its internal control procedures over compliance. Recommendation:  Management  should  implement  controls  related  to  documentation  of  approval for all transactions prior to the expense being paid to the grant. Management’s Response: See corrective action plan.

Finding 2023‐002: Allowable costs – Material weakness over internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 21.027. Criteria:  Section  200  of  the  Code  of  Federal  Regulations  requires  recipients  to  have  a  cost  allocation plan in place for allocated costs that is consistently followed and supported. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, 19 out of 25 samples were not 100% charged to the grant and were not supported by a cost allocation plan for how the percentages charged to the grant were determined. Cause: Turnover in the Organization and lack of knowledge of allocated cost requirements. Recommendation:  In  order  to  comply  with  the  Uniform  Guidance  federal  regulations,  we recommend a cost allocation methodology is put in place that is easy to follow and consistently applied throughout the  year. In addition, support of all calculations should be kept on file to document how the allocation was determined. Management’s response: See corrective action plan.

Finding 2023‐003: Allowable costs – Significant deficiency over internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 21.027. Criteria:  The  Uniform  Guidance  requires  that  costs  be  adequately  documented.  The  Organization’s internal control procedures over compliance specify that all employees’ timesheets and hours agree to the payroll register and to the amount allocated to grant activities. Condition: During allowable cost testing for federal grants, for 1 of the 25 payroll transactions tested, the amount of time charged to the grant did not agree to the employee's timesheet. The amount of time that was charged to the grant was greater than what was approved to be charged to the grant per the employee’s timesheet hours and grant budget allocations. Cause: This was due to a input error with the employees percentage charged to the grant for the year. Effect: The employee’s payroll was not accurately allocated to the grant based on actual time and effort. Questioned costs: None. Recommendation: Hours worked towards the grant on the approved timesheet should be used to  determine  how  much  of  the  employee’s  time  is  charged  to  the  grant.  Requests  for  reimbursement should reviewed in detail to ensure all payroll costs are properly supported by time sheets. Management’s response: See corrective action plan.