My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0918.001 2022-2024
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2022-2024
>
COM 0918.001 2022-2024
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/3/2024 8:21:01 AM
Creation date
6/24/2024 12:29:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2022-2024
Communication
0918
Point
001
Author
Holeka Goro Inaba, Council Member
Communications - Referred To
GOEAC
Document Relationships
AGE GOEAC 2024/07/09 (2022-2024)
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2022-2024\Governmental Operations and External Affairs Committee (GOEAC)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Summary of Results <br /> We tested all 61 organizations that received funds in Fiscal Year 2022-2023(100%). Our results <br /> are as follows: <br /> • Two organizations could not administer their program and returned funds to the County <br /> • One organization went defunct and subsequently could not produce data related to the <br /> program <br /> Of the remaining 58 organizations, we verified documentation pertaining to community outreach, <br /> participation, receipts, and found: <br /> Community Outreach <br /> • Documentation related to community outreach were generally appropriate <br /> • No exceptions noted <br /> • Not all programs require outreach when the public purpose or benefit is apparent <br /> Participation <br /> • Documentation related to participation were generally appropriate <br /> • We found 15 exceptions: <br /> o Nine organizations did.not track or obtain attendance <br /> o Three organizations submitted attendance records that did not fully account for all <br /> participants, resulting in discrepancies between the final reports and the verifiable <br /> numbers of individuals served, partially attributed to the design of specific programs <br /> as "booth style,"which focused on community engagement without formally tracking <br /> participant numbers. Moreover, for organizations hosting multiple events, attendance <br /> data was recorded for some events but omitted for others. <br /> o Three organizations with multi-programs counted the same populations redundantly <br /> Receipts <br /> • While most revenue and expenditure details were generally appropriate and aligned with <br /> the intent of the projects, we found the following exceptions: <br /> Lack of supporting documentation <br /> o Missing or unclear receipts resulted in an inability to verify all expenditures <br /> o Actual expenditures did not always align to budget expenditures <br /> • A program proposal lacked clarity distinguishing whether a position description referred to <br /> an existing or new employee <br /> • An out-of-state professional services contractor had supplies shipped. Receipts lacking <br /> data made verifying shipping location impossible <br /> • One NPO converted grant dollars to the denomination of an out-of-state professional <br /> services provider, but foreign exchange rate data was not provided <br /> • An organization added bonuses to wages from the grant award <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.