Grays Harbor County was dinged with two audit findings by the State Auditor’s Office during a recent audit.

The audit, an annual process by the State Auditor’s Office, reviewed specific financial records between Jan. 1, 2016, and Dec. 31, 2016.

One finding addressed errors on the “schedule of expenditures of federal awards” (SEFA) for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund Cluster and errors on the SEFA for the Community Development Block Grant.

The other finding was for a lack of internal control for the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program.

SEFA finding

According to the finding, “the county had a miscommunication among employees regarding which expenditures were spent during the audit period. The county employees had a lack of understanding over financial statement reporting requirements that would ensure the SEFA was prepared accurately and completely or to provide an adequate secondary review.”

More than $145,000 was expended in 2017 but reported for 2016 for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund Cluster. Similarly, more than $206,000 was expended in 2017 but reported for 2016 for the Community Development Block Grant.

The county said the confusion was a result of staffing changes.

“Due to the retirement of several key employees, this was the first year reporting was done by some of our staff,” the county’s response in the finding states. “We have already taken steps for several grant management staff to enroll in training which will enhance their understanding of accounting and reporting requirements. We will continue to make improvements to our year-end review and reporting process along with reviewing the internal control procedures.”

WIC finding

During 2016, the county spent nearly $294,000 in federal grant funds for the WIC program, which helps women, infants and children by providing “supplemental nutritious foods, nutrition education and referrals to health care for low-income people.”

The county calculated a percentage of payroll costs (a total of $16,694) and incorrectly allocated those costs to the grant as direct costs. According to the finding, administrative expenditures should be classified as indirect costs under federal regulations. Additionally, the county already uses an indirect cost rate and can’t charge those payrolls costs to the program at all.

In response the county wrote that employees had been notified and are correctly billing their time as of September 2017.