grantcheck

Colorado · Local government · under $2M in federal spending

THE LOOP WATER AUTHORITY

DENVER, CO

The FY2025 single audit reports 1 finding: 1 significant deficiency.

Score: 8 of 100 (FY2025 audit)

The sum of eight parts, each read from the audit. How the score works.

PartRulePointsMax
Material weaknesses8 points each024
Significant deficiencies3 points each39
Repeat findings5 points each015
Longest repeat chain2 years 3, 3 years 6, 4 years 9, 5+ years 12012
Modified major-program opinionsqualified 8 each; any adverse or disclaimer 15015
Questioned costsknown amount of $25,000 or more, by share and dollars015
Going concernauditor included a going-concern paragraph55
Prior-year latenessprior-year audit late or not filed, scored only with a finding05
Score8100

Federal funding, FY2025

$1,430,009 in federal awards spent, across 1 program. Largest funding agencies:

AgencySpent
Department of the Treasury$1,430,009

FY2025 audit

FAC record
2025-12-GSAFAC-0000430319
Fiscal year end
December 31, 2025
Accepted by FAC
September 29, 2026
Federal spending
$1,430,009 · 1 program
Major programs
1
Going concern
The auditor included a going-concern paragraph.
Score
8 of 100

Finding 2025-001

significant deficiency

Program
CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS (21.027)
Compliance requirement
Procurement and suspension and debarment
FAC record
FY2025 audit on fac.gov
Finding text from the filing

Criteria or Specific Requirement – Management is required to ensure that there are sufficient internal controls in place over program purchasing. This includes use of the Authority’s own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable state and local law regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal law and standards. As well as, internal controls that ensure that documentation is maintained to support compliance with the procurement policy. Conditions – The Authority has a formalized procurement policy (the policy). However, the policy does not conform to applicable standards under Uniform Guidance because it does not include procedures to ensure the Authority does not enter into covered transactions with entities that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded. We noted during our testing that there was limited documentation of the Authority's procedures for verifying that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded. Context – During our testing of procurement, we sampled eight expenditures totaling $641,520 consisting of transactions with three companies. We noted that four of the selections with one company totaling $250,774 did not have SAMS.gov verification or compliance certification documentation. However, as part of our audit procedures, we determined that the expenditures were made with contractors which were not suspended or disbarred and were approved on the SAMS.gov website. Cause – Procurement policy was not sufficient to ensure full compliance. Effect or Potential Effect – The use of non-approved vendors could have occurred. However, as part of our audit procedures, we determined that the expenditures were made with contractors which were not suspended or disbarred and were approved on the SAMS.gov website. Recommendation – We recommend that management strengthen their formal procurement policy using the guidance of 2 CFR 200.317 –200.327. Additionally, management should follow this policy when procuring services or property and maintain the related documentation. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the finding. Management is in the process of reviewing and revising its policies.