PWS_Attachment_11-YCP-RM_Compliance_Checklist_V2_(Oct_16-Sep_17)_.docx

ChalleNGe Operational and Resource Effectiveness Program/State:

Date:

Functional Area:

Resource Management Compliance Rate:

Analyst’s Information:

TASK: Manage National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program federally appropriated/allocated funds.

CONDITION: Given an assignment to manage federally appropriated funds or allocated funds for the Youth ChalleNGe Program, ensure effective, proper fund control and management of these funds IAW applicable Department of Defense (DoD), Defense Finance and Accounting System (DFAS), Service Regulations, and National Guard Bureau regulations and references. The period of review dates back to the last closed Cooperative Agreement and/or the last CORE inspection as needed to determine systemic compliance.

STANDARD: Comply with the requirements and standards articulated in the following references: NG PAM (AR) 37-1, dtd 15 Sep 99, NGR 5-1, dtd 28 May 10, National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program-Cooperative Agreement (NGYCP-CA) 4001, dtd Jan 2015, ChalleNGe Program Publication 1 (CP-1), dtd 23 Sep 2009, ChalleNGe Program Publication 3-1 (CP 3-1), dtd 30 Sep 10, 31 CFR, Part 205, 32 CFR 33.32, AR 735-5, dtd 28 Feb 05, 32 USC 645, DoDFMR, Volume 14, DFAS-IN 37-1, dtd May 08 AR 25-400-2, dtd 7 Oct 07, NGR 5-2, dtd 14 Oct 10, AR 11-2, dtd 4 Jan 10,Grants Cooperative Agreements Policy Letter (GCAPL) #15-4 dated 5 May 2015, Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01 (Nov15), and National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program Training Policy dated 11 May 2016.

Terminal Task

Program Level

1. Has the Budget Officer complied with the responsibilities as described in the Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01?

Ref: Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01, Enclosure A, paragraph 10.

Inspected Items: See questions 1a-1b below.

1a. Did the Budget Officer develop an annual budget to submit for the Program Director’s review and approval?

Inspected Items: Current budget with supporting documentation.

1b. . Did the Budget Officer attend quarterly reviews as directed by the USPFO and GOR?

Inspected Items: Sign-in documentation or email transmission.

2. Did the program prepare and submit a budget IAW NGYCP-CA?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 402(b)-(c).

Inspected Item: The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection. If there have been no submissions since the last inspection review the most recent submission. See questions 2a-2c below.

2a. Was the budget submitted to NG-J1-AY not later than 90 days prior to the start of the Program Fiscal Year (PFY)?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 402b.

Inspected Item: Dated documentation that clearly shows transmission to NG-J1-AY was within the required timeframe.

2b. Did the proposed budget include an updated annual goal-focused State Plan?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 402c.

Inspected Item: Dated documentation that shows the goal-focused State Plan was submitted with the budget submission.

2c. Did the proposed budget submission include the certification of State funds?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 402c.

Inspected Item: Dated documentation that demonstrates that a copy of the signed Grantee (State) certification memo was submitted as part of the budget submission.

3. Is all Program Income added to the budget as a Grantee (State) contribution? Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 405 and NGR 5-1 paragraph 6-2a.

Inspected Item: Program Budget. Note: IAW NGR 5-1, paragraph 6-2a, Program Income cannot be used to meet any of the state match requirement nor will it result in an increase in the level of federal funding.

4. Are costs for food and equipment provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture through the School Lunch Program accounted for in the approved budget plan?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-5a.

Inspected Item: All postings of funds to the YCP account made since the last CORE inspection.

5. Does the Program have a process in place to ensure all costs associated with the host installation are being properly charged? (Recommended) Ref: CP 3-1 Chapter 1, 3B.

Inspected Item: Review the following items: any active agreeements, work order requests, completed work orders, invoices, and requests for payment.

6. At State owned/operated or leased dining facilities, are meals consumed by the Program tracked and applicable funds reimbursed within standards?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-5.

Inspected Item: See questions 6a-6d below.

6a. Are meals consumed by visitors at a dining facility operated by the State tracked and treated as program income?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-5a(1)(c).

Inspected Item: Obtain copies of dining facility visitor logs and food service records. Ensure that the amount collected is included as part of the program income, regardless of the federal contribution reflected in the agreement.

6b. Are reimbursed food service costs to the State from the Federal Government no more than $20 per day, per cadet?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-5a(1)(a).

Inspected Item: Ensure the amounts reimbursed for meals consumed do not exceed the allowable amount authorized. Reconcile cost of food provided against cadet consumed meals.

6c. If the Federal Government operates the dining facility, does the Federal Government reimburse the State only for meals provided to cadets?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-5a(2).

Inspected Item: Obtain copies of reimbursement requests and compare against the dining facility sign-in logs.

6d. If the Federal Government operates the dining facility, does the program reimburse Cadre who are in direct supervision of Cadets at the time of meals the cost of those meals as part of their salary?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-5a(2).

Inspected Item: Review reimbursement vouchers for Cadre meals (random sample 25%).

7. Is food provided at special events consumed only by Cadets and allowable staff?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305e and Attachment 1, Section 1-5a.

Inspected Item: Obtain copies of sign-in logs for specific events. Conduct a random sample of food logs during special events to ensure that family members and guests did not eat at the event.

8. Are Quarterly Reports submitted not later than 30 days after the end of each quarter?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 402a(3).

Inspected Item: All Quarterly Reports since the last CORE inspection.

9. Did the Program obtain prior written approval from the Program Office (NG-J1-AY) for any budget changes in excess of 10% of the total approved operating budget?

Ref: GCAPL #15-4 dated 5 May 2015.

Inspected Item: Verify Program Office (NG-J1-AY) approval documentation. Note: This may be in email or memoranda form.

10. Does the Program maintain an informal commitment ledger?

Ref: NG Pam (AR) 37-1 paragraphs 3-4 and 3-5, DoDFMR Vol 14 Chapter 2, Section 0202.

Inspected Item: See questions 10a-10b below.

10a. Is the informal commitment ledger current?

Ref: DoDFMR Vol 14 Chapter 2, Section 020203.

Inspected Item: Verify the information on the ledger is accurate and current.

10b. Does the ledger contain sufficient detail to ensure unliquidated obligations/disbursements are justifiable and still valid?

Ref: NG PAM (AR) 37-1, paragraphs 3-4 and 3-5.

Inspected Item: Verify the mechanism used can provide the necessary information.

11. Does the Program have a Standing Operating Procedure (SOP) for budget management? (Recommended) Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201d(3).

Inspected Item: Current SOP.

12. Has the Program Director reviewed and updated standard operating procedures biennially to align with current guidance?

Ref: Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01, Enclosure A, paragraph 9.j.

Inspected Item: Cover memo dated and signed by the Program Director validating the required SOP has been reviewed and updated.

13. Does the Program have a mechanism for receiving donations and/or grants? (Recommended) Ref: ChalleNGe Publication 3-1 Chapter 1, paragraph 1A.

Inspected Item: Written process or procedure for receiving donations. Note: If the donations are received by a non-profit organization, the SOP or by-laws for the non-profit will be reviewed.

14. Does the program properly manage travel funds?

Ref: ChalleNGe Publication 1 Chapter V, Section 4, paragraph B4.

Inspected Item: The period of review includes all travel since the last CORE inspection. See questions 14a-14b below.

14a. Does the Program use travel funds for the sole purpose of training program staff and conducting special projects on behalf of the Program?

Inspected Item: Sample 25% of actual travel vouchers. Note: a register or summary of travel reimbursements is not sufficient. The actual vouchers will be reviewed. If questions arise concerning course validity, review a copy of the current year Annual Course Catalog and a copy of the staff training calendar. If special projects have been funded, verify they were for NGB approved events.

14b. Does the Program ensure that lodging and per diem reimbursements do not exceed the Joint Travel Regulation (JTR) limits?

Inspected Item: Sample set of actual travel vouchers showing reimbursed amounts for lodging and per diem.

15. Has the Program ensured that personnel costs do not exceed 80% of the total annual funding level or the approved Federal GS level salaries?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305a and Attachment 1, Section 1-9a.

Inspected Item: Budget documentation showing total personnel costs. The period of review includes the current budget year and the prior year. Note: Personnel costs shall not exceed 80% of the total annual funding level. Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) may be added to the GS level, Step 10, as locally applicable. Grantee programs may select any combination of positions authorized by the Staffing Model at their level of organization (100, 144, 175, 200, or 400). Programs that exceed the approved GS level or the 80% cap limitations are authorized to do so using state discretionary funds (not state match dollars).

16. Does the Program have a Standing Operating Procedure (SOP) for logistics/supply? (Recommended) Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201d(3).

Inspected Item: Current SOP.

17. Does the Program have a system in place to manage work orders prepared for the host installation and other sources? (Recommended)

Inspected Item: Review Maintenance SOP, Installation SOP, invoices for contracted work.

18. Does the Program have a mechanism to track expended funds for Cadets?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305b(1)-(9).

Inspected Item: The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection except for question 16e. See questions 18a-18e below.

18a. Have clothing and equipment costs not exceeded $500 per cadet?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305b(1).

Inspected Item: Actual purchase orders or purchase receipts for all cadet clothing purchases and a sample set of cadet clothing records. Note: This item is NOT Inspected in the aggregate. Consolidated budget object code entries are not sufficient to show compliance. The analyst will determine the clothing quantities and types issued to each cadet and determine total cost based upon purchase orders/receipts.

18b. Are cadet laundry expenses limited to no more than $10 per week per cadet (bulk items and dry cleaning between cycle items are exempt)?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305b(3).

Inspected Item: Purchase orders and/or receipts for cleaning services. Note: This will be marked N/A if the program provides access to clothing washers and dryers for personal cadet laundry.

18c. Are field trip expenses limited to no more than $25 per month, per cadet?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305b(2).

Inspected Item: Purchase orders and/or receipts for field trips. Note: The total cost of all trips will be divided by the number of cadets attending.

18d. Are cadet weekly living allowances limited to no more than $15 per week?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305b(4).

Inspected Item: Tracking system for living allowances. Note: The requirement to limit cadet weekly living allowances implies some form of discrete tracking system to be able to demonstrate compliance.

18e. Are cadet graduation stipends limited to no more than $2,200?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305b(9).

Inspected Item: Canceled checks or other documentation that shows the total value of the stipend. Note: The period of review for this question will include sufficient time to determine compliance.

19. Does the Program collect issued clothing items from non-graduating cadets?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-8a(1)(b).

Inspected Item: Former cadet clothing records, turn-in documents, and/or SOP. Note: Failure to return these items will result in the cost being withheld from the accrued allowance for expenses.

20. When a cadet is terminated, does the Program pay the balance of the remaining living allowance from funds already issued to that cadet?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-6e.

Inspected Item: Documentation showing the payment was made. Note: This applies when cadets are paid a weekly living allowance. Any funds remaining in the cadet’s account will be paid to the cadet.

21. When a cadet graduates, does the Program pay the balance of the remaining weekly living allowance from funds issued during the class cycle to that cadet?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-6e.

Inspected Item: Documentation showing the payment was made.

22. Do all Program volunteers sign a waiver against any and all claims against the Government?

Ref: NG PAM (AR) 37-1 Chapter 3, paragraph 3-4c(8).

Inspected Item: Listing of volunteers reconciled against waiver file.

23. Does the Program reimburse guest speakers IAW the limitations in the NGYCP-CA?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305b(8).

Inspected Item: The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection. See questions 23a-23b below.

23a. Does the Program limit guest speaker reimbursements to no more than the daily wage rate for a GS-15?

Inspected Item: Documentation showing amounts paid to guest speakers.

23b. Does the Program limit guest speaker travel reimbursements to no more than the rates defined in the JFTR?

Inspected Item: Documentation showing amounts paid to guest speakers.

24. Does the Program limit uniform expenses for Cadre to $300 per year?

Ref: NGYCP-CA, Attachment 1, Section 1-8a(3) and Section 305c(1).

Inspected Item: Cadre clothing records, expense reports, purchase orders, and/or receipts. The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection. Note: This requirement will NOT be Inspected in the aggregate. A specific cost per cadre member must be determined.

25. Do reimbursements made to the State for costs of required transportation for Cadets exceed the rate of State-leased vehicles?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 305h(2).

Inspected Item: The state rate for leased vehicles of similar size to that used to transport cadets, and the purchase order or contract for the vehicles used to transport the cadets. The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection. Note: If the state contracting office developed and issued the contract each time (or as a standing contract) transport was required, this question will be marked as a “go”.

26. Has the Program complied with the prohibition to purchase vehicles?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 306a.

Inspected Item: Property book, informal commitment ledger, contracts. The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection.

27. Has the Program limited Federal reimbursement (less salaries) for public information and recruiting operations to $30,000 or less per Program Fiscal Year?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-6a.

Inspected Item: Documentation to show the date and cost of each expenditure (informal commitment ledger or source document). The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection.

28. Does the Program manage a petty cash fund in compliance with applicable State regulations?

Ref: State Regulations.

Inspected Item: Petty Cash management informal commitment ledger or checkbook and copy of operative state laws. The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection. Note: This also includes cash/donations with monetary value received from any source outside the cooperative agreement in support of the program. If the fund contains purely state discretionary funds (i.e., money not tied to the CA), this question will be marked N/A.

29. Does the program utilize a State debit/credit card in compliance with applicable State regulations?

Ref: State Regulations.

Inspected Item: State SOP. Review receipts and reconciliation documents.

30. Does the Program have a system in place for property accountability?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2, 32 CFR 33.32(d)(3), AR 735-5 paragraph 2-8, and NGYCP-CA Section 1001.

Inspected Item: See questions 30a-30d below.

30a. Has the Program established a control system that ensures adequate safeguards are in place to prevent loss, damage, or theft of property?

Ref: 32 CFR 33.32(d)(3) AR 735-5, paragraph 2-8, and 5-1, paragraph 8-2c(3).

Inspected Item: Review the Supply SOP.

30b. At a minimum, does the Program conduct a physical inventory at least every two years of all property?

Ref: 32 CFR 33.32(d)(2), NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c, and NGYCP-CA Section 1001b.

Inspected Item: Validate that a complete property inventory is being conducted at least every two years.

30c. At a minimum, does the Program reconcile the results with the property accountability records?

Ref: 32 CFR 33.32(d)(2), NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c, and NGYCP-CA Section 1001b.

Inspected Item: Validate that the Program reconciled the results with the property accountability records.

30d. Does the Program properly dispose of equipment?

Ref: 32 CFR 33.32(e) and NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2d.

Inspected Item: Verify disposition records.

31. Does the Program properly account for Government Furnished Property/Equipment (GFP/GFE)?

Ref: 32 CFR 33.32(f)(2) and NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c(2).

Inspected Item: See questions 31a-31c below.

Note: Specific to Youth ChalleNGe, GFP/GFE is property purchased and owned by the federal government that is authorized for use by a Youth ChalleNGe program. Programs co-located on a federal installation will normally have GFP/GFE. GFP/GFE is not IKA as title remains vested in the Federal Government. The period of review dates back to the last inventory or last CORE inspection.

31a. Does the Program conduct an annual inventory of all Government Furnished Property/Equipment (GFP/GFE)?

Inspected Item: Annual inventory listing.

31b. Does the Program forward the results of the Government Furnished Property/Equipment (GFP/GFE) annual inventory listing to the Grantor (USPFO)?

Inspected Item: Dated documentation of the annual inventory listing and results of the inventory.

31c. Has damage to or loss of federal owned/leased equipment been reported and investigated by the Federal CA PM or Federal Property account holder IAW applicable DoD and Service level property accountability regulations?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-4d.

Inspected Item: Dated documentation to show date of loss or damage with sufficient detail and that it was reported to the USPFO.

32. Does the Program properly manage property acquired through In-Kind Assistance (IKA)?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2a-b and AR 735-5 paragraph 2.

Inspected Item: Federal Property Book. Note: In Kind Assistance is property purchased by the Federal Government and provided to the programs in lieu of funds to meet NGB’s cost share. It also occurs when the USPFO allows the program to use the federal procurement system to obtain goods or services.

33. Does the Program have a mechanism in place to track funds used in support of IKA purchases?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-7a.

Inspected Item: MOD showing the movement of funds out of the agreement and the internal tracking system.

34. Unless prohibited by State law, has the Program properly managed and accounted for property purchased by the Grantee (State) in accordance with regulatory guidance?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c(1)-(4).

Inspected Item: See questions 34a-34d below. The period of review dates back to the last CORE inspection.

34a. Does the Program maintain property records for state owned property?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c(1).

Inspected Item: State Property book.

34b. Does the Program track state owned property by the following categories:

· description of the property

· a serial number or other identification number

· the source of property

· who holds title

· the acquisition date

· the cost of the property

· the percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the property

· the location, use and condition of the property

· disposition data including the date of disposal and sale price Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c(1).

Inspected Item: Property Book.

34c. At least once every two years has a physical inventory of the property been conducted.

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c(2) and CFR 33.32(d)(2).

Inspected Item: Property inventory, point of contact information, signature and date of completion.

34. Upon completion of the mandatory property inventory, are the results reconciled with the previous grantee property records and reported to the Grantor?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c(2) Inspected Item: Correspondence verifying transmittal of reconciled property inventory. Documentation must include date of completion, point of contact information and signature.

35. Have adequate maintenance procedures been developed by Grantee (State) recipients to keep the property in good condition?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2c(4).

Inspected Item: Supply SOP and maintenance records.

36. Has damage to or loss of Program property or equipment been reported and investigated IAW with State policy?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-4d.

Inspected Item: Dated documentation to show the date of loss or damage, the circumstances and description of the item(s) lost or damaged.

37. Did the Program notify the Grantee (State) of intention to dispose of Cooperative Agreement purchased equipment?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 1001a and NGR 5-1 paragraph 8-2b.

Inspected Item: Correspondence indicating name/nomenclature of item and serial number or identification code.

38. Has the Program Director implemented adequate management and internal controls to protect Federal and State interests?

Ref: Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01, Enclosure A, paragraph 9.e.

Inspected Item: Documentation reflecting Program Director’s management and internal controls, i.e. a completed risk assessment or management control checklist.

39. Has the Program Director reviewed all obligations to ensure they are valid and justifiable requirements?

Ref: Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01, Enclosure A, paragraph 9.h.

Inspected Item: A Memorandum for Record (MFR) signed by the Program Director (PD) indicating when the PD conducted reconciliations, the period of time covered in each reconciliation, funding amounts reconciled, and any discrepancies identified.

40. Has the Program Director verified that Federal and State funds are expended on authorized projects and activities as set forth in the NGYCP-CA and the applicable CNGB issuances?

Ref: Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01, Enclosure A, paragraph 9.d.

Inspected Item: Informal Commitment Ledger

41. Has the Director completed Cooperative Agreement training within the first year of appointment?

Ref: National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program Training Policy dated 11 May 2016.

Inspected Item: Certificate of training.

42. Has the Program Director completed Fiscal Law training within the first year of appointment?

43. Has the Budget Officer completed Cooperative Agreement training within six (6) months of appointment?

44. Has the Budget Officer completed Fiscal Law training within six (6) months of appointment?

45. Has the Budget Officer completed the mandatory Federal training Budget Course within six (6) months of appointment?

46. Did the Program take corrective action for findings or issues identified in audits or inspections?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-2b(5), Section 1-3, and Report of Evaluation Memorandum from Chief, NG-J1-AY.

Inspected Item: See questions 46a-46d below.

46a. Did the Program develop a Corrective Action Plan?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-2b(5), Section 1-3 and Report of Evaluation Memorandum from Chief, NG-J1-AY.

Inspected Item: Review Corrective Action Plan.

46b. Was the Corrective Action Plan submitted on time?

Note: 30 days from receipt of ROE Memorandum from Chief, NG-J1-AY for significant findings or 60 days from receipt of ROE Memorandum from Chief, NG-J1-AY for ROE’s without significant findings.

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section b(5), Section 1-3, and Report Of Evaluation Memorandum from Chief, NG-J1-AY.

Inspected Item: Review transmittal email or mail receipt.

46c. Did the Corrective Action Plan address each area of non-compliance from the Report of Evaluation?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-2b(5), Section 1-3 and Report of Evaluation Memorandum from Chief, NG-J1-AY.

Inspected Item: Corrective Action Plan and Report of Evaluation.

46d. Did each strategy from the Corrective Action Plan resolve the issue of non-compliance?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-2b(5), Section 1-3, and Report Of Evaluation Memorandum from Chief, NG-J1-AY.

Inspected Item: Compare NO-GOs from previous inspection.

47. Did the Program fulfill the requirements of the biennial Director’s Self-Assessment?

Ref: NGYCP-CA, Section 201, paragraph d (3), CORE Program Manager Email containing the Memo from Chief, NG-J1-AY, and Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01, Enclosure A, paragraph 9.i.

Inspected Item: Questions 47a - 47d below.

47a. Did the Program complete all components of the Director’s Self-Assessment?

Ref: NGYCP-CA, Section 201, paragraph d(3), CORE Program Manager Email containing the Memo from Chief, NG-J1-AY, and Chief National Guard Bureau Instruction 9350.01, Enclosure A, paragraph 9.i.Inspected Item: Review copy of Self-Assessment.

47b. Was the Program Director’s Self-Assessment submitted within the required timeframe included in the Memo from Chief, NG-J1-AY?

Ref: CORE Program Manager email containing the Memo from Chief, NG-J1-AY Inspected Item: Review transmittal email or mail receipt.

47c. Did the Director’s Self-Assessment identify all areas of non-compliance?

Ref: CORE Program Manager Email containing the Memo from Chief, NG-J1-AY Inspected Item: Review copy of Self-Assessment.

47d. Have all areas identified as non-compliant in the Director’s Self-Assessment been brought into compliance?

Ref: CORE Program Manager Email containing the Memo from Chief, NG-J1-AY Inspected Item: Review copy of Self-Assessment.

Federal/State Oversight

48. Has the Grantee (State) provided certification of cash and non-cash contributions of required matching funds for the current Fiscal Year?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201b (1).

Inspected Item: Signed and dated certification memorandum.

49. Did the Grantee (State) provide certification of cash and non-cash contributions of the required State match for all open years?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201b (1).

50. If the Grantee’s (State) share of cash funding for the current year is from sources outside the respective Grantee's State appropriation, did the State Comptroller/Treasurer, or designated responsible individual, certify that the funds are available and are exclusively committed for the express purpose of funding the Grantee's (State) share of the Program?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201b (1)(a).

Inspected Item: Certification memorandum signed and dated by the State Comptroller or designated state official. Note: There are some situations where funds are provided from outside the state military department, usually from other departments within the state government. In these situations this provision applies.

51. If the Grantee’s (State) contribution is made entirely in cash, was the cash equal to the minimum funding contribution of 25%, as determined and provided by the Program Office (NG-J1-AY)?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201b(1)(a).

52. If the Grantee (State) fulfilled its contribution requirement by combining the value of cash and equipment, buildings, and land contributions, were the non-cash contributions IAW the conditions specified in the NGYCP-CA?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201b(1)(b) and (c).

Inspected Item: See questions 52a-52c below.

52a. Was the valuation of equipment, buildings, and land contributions calculated IAW DODGARS 3210.6-R, Section 33.24(d) (e) (f) and (g)?

Ref: DODGARS 3210.6-R Section 33.24(d)(e)(f) and (g) and NGYCP-CA Section 201b(1)(c).

Inspected Item: Documents providing detailed calculations of value.

52b. Did the Grantee (State) have the market value or fair rental value set by an independent appraiser?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201b(1)(c).

Inspected Item: Signed and dated copy of the appraisal. Note: The appraisal must contain sufficient detail to establish market and/or rental values. This document must be able to withstand legal review.

52c. Did the Grantee (State) certify the value or rate set by the independent appraiser?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201b(1)(c).

Inspected Item: Signed and dated Grantee certification memorandum. Note: The designated representative signing on behalf as the Grantee must be authorized to perform this function.

53. Are the Grantee (State) non-cash contributions 10% or less of the total State match contribution?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 201b(2).

Inspected Item: Dated and signed documentation that shows the actual dollar amount of the non-cash contribution claimed. Note: Any exception to the 10% limit requires NGB written approval.

54. Did the Grantee (State) credit its share of the cost of In-Kind Assistance against costs claimed for reimbursement or as a credit on an advance payment request?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-7 Inspected Item: Verify that the State has not decreased the required 25% State match.

55. Does the Program operate on the ADVANCE PAYMENT method?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5 and NGYCP-CA Section 503.

Inspected Item: See questions 55a-55f below.

If the Program does not use the advance payment method, mark N/A.

55a. Did the Grantee (State) submit a signed memorandum requesting authority for the advance method to the USPFO NLT 1 Sep for the next Federal fiscal year?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5a.

Inspected Item: Signed and dated memorandum.

55b. Does the memorandum include an Estimated Cash Flow Chart prepared IAW NGR 5-1, figure 11-2?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5a(1) and figure 11-2.

Inspected Item: Estimated Cash Flow chart.

55c. Does the memorandum contain a statement that the Grantee (State) agrees that all advance payments shall be used solely for authorized services as specified in the NGYCP-CA?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5a(3).

Inspected Item: Memorandum. See NGR 5-1, figure 11-1 for an example.

55d. Does the memorandum contain a statement that the Grantee (State) agrees that all books and records shall be made available, on request, for properly authorized representatives of the USPFO, CNGB, the Comptroller General, and if necessary, the State Auditor?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5a(4).

55e. Does the memorandum contain a statement that the Grantee (State) agrees to minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of funds from the U.S. Treasury and their disbursement by the State? (No more than 45 days) Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5a(5).

55f. Does the memorandum contain the name, address, telephone number, and email address of the State action officer to contact for additional information or if clarification is required?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5a(6).

56. Does the Grantee (State) submit an updated Estimated Cash Flow Requirements Chart with each monthly or periodic request for a cash advance payment?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5a(2).

Inspected Item: Review each SF 270 showing federal advance payments. There must be an associated Grantee (State) request that corresponds to the SF 270.

57. Did the Grantee (State) place the advance payment amount in an account indicating that it is an advance for the State Army or Air National Guard?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5b(1).

Inspected Item: The federal advance payment will be transmitted on a SF 270. A copy of the SF 270 showing the actual amount of the advance payment will be reviewed, as well as the corresponding state account where these funds were deposited.

58. Did the Grantee (State) issue a check payable to the Disbursing Officer for any balance remaining on the advance at the time the Cooperative Agreement is completed?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5b(3).

Inspected Item: Copy of the check with transmittal memorandum and/or acknowledgement of receipt from USPFO.

59. If applicable, has the Grantee (State) calculated the amount of interest due to the United States on funds advanced to the State?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-5c(1)(3) and 11-9.

Inspected Item: Documentation showing the calculation of interest. Note: Payments should be made promptly (at least quarterly). The Grantee may keep interest amounts of $100.00 per year for administrative expenses.

60. If the program uses the REIMBURSEMENT method for payment, has the Grantee (State) followed the proper process for requesting reimbursement for all allowable CA costs?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-4.

Inspected Item: See questions 60a-60b below.

60a. Has the Grantee (State) provided a SF 270 with supporting documentation to the CA Federal Program Manager for each reimbursement request?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-4a.

Inspected Item: SF 270's.

60b. Has the supporting documentation been itemized by AMSCO, identifying the amount of funds expended and the corresponding Grantee accounting classification to be reimbursed?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-4a.

Inspected Item: The Lines of Accounting (LOA) on the SF 270's. Note: the LOAs must correspond to entries in the state system.

61. Is Program Income being properly executed by the Grantee (State)?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 6-2(a)(b) and 11-6 (a)(c)(e).

Inspected Item: See questions 61a-61b below.

61a. Is Program Income received by the Grantee (State) from the Youth ChalleNGe Program?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 6-2(a).

Inspected Item: Copies of funds received.

61b. Is Program Income properly credited to the Youth ChalleNGe expenditures by the Grantee (State)?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 6-2(a).

Inspected Item: Grantee (State) records indicating the funds received from the Youth ChalleNGe Program AND the funds being credited toward the Youth ChalleNGe Program expenditures.

62. Are costs for food and equipment provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) through the School Lunch Program properly executed by the Grantee (State)?

Inspected Item: See questions 62a-62c below.

62a. Are the reimbursements received from the USDA School Lunch Program for the Youth ChalleNGe Program?

Inspected Item: Copies of funds received.

62b. Are the funds received from the USDA School Lunch program properly credited against the Youth ChalleNGe Program?

Inspected Item: Grantee (State) records indicating the funds received from the Youth ChalleNGe Program AND the funds being credited toward the Youth ChalleNGe Program expenditures.

62c. Has the USDA School Lunch Program provided any equipment for the Youth ChalleNGe Program?

Inspected Item: Grantee (State) records indicating equipment received for the Youth ChalleNGe Program.

63. Is Centralized Personnel Plan (CPP) used to seek reimbursements for incremental, direct, and personnel costs that are compensation for staff positions that would not exist if CAs did not exist?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 5-5c.

Inspected Item: Review a copy of the CPP, ensure the plan is current and includes a separate employee breakout.

64. Has the Grantee (State) properly executed documents in preparation of the close out process?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Section 203, NGR 5-1, paragraph 11-10.

Inspected Item: See questions 64a-64d below.

64a. Within 90 days after the end of the federal Fiscal Year, or upon termination or closeout of an Agreement, whichever is earlier, did the Grantee (State) provide the USPFO a final accounting of all funding and disbursements under the agreement for the fiscal year?

Ref: NGR 5-1, paragraph 11-10b.

Inspected Item: Final closeout modification.

64b. In situations where un-liquidated claims and/or un-disbursed obligations will remain 90 days or so thereafter the end of the Program Fiscal Year, did the Grantee (State) provide a written request to the USPFO to keep the agreement open?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 11-10c.

Inspected Item: Dated and signed written request to the USPFO.

64c. In situations where un-liquidated claims and/or un-disbursed obligations will remain 90 days or so thereafter the end of the Program Fiscal Year, did the Grantee (State) provide a consolidated, detailed listing of all un-cleared obligations?

Inspected Item: A detailed listing of all un-cleared obligations and the projected timetable (date) for their liquidation and disbursement. Note: This listing will normally be an enclosure to the request to keep the agreement open.

64d. Did the consolidated, detailed listing of all un-cleared obligations include a projected timetable (date) for their liquidation and disbursements to the USPFO?

Inspected Item: A detailed listing of all un-cleared obligations and the projected timetable (date) for their liquidation and disbursement. Note: This listing will normally be an enclosure to the request to keep the agreement open.

65. Did the Grantee (State) receive notification from the USPFO setting a new timetable for the Grantee to submit final accounting and settlement?

Inspected Item: Notification (memorandum) from USPFO must include the new timetable for submittal of required documents, date and USPFO signature.

66. Did the Grantee (State) submit subsequent extension requests every 90 days or so thereafter as long as un-liquidated claims or un-disbursed obligations remain?

Inspected Item: Signed and dated memorandum to the USPFO requesting an extension.

67. Did the Grantee (State) annually certify that the benefit packages for Program employees do not exceed the minimum required by the statute for state employees?

Ref: NGYCP-CA Attachment I, Section 1-9a.

Inspected Item: Signed and dated certification memorandum.

Note: This will be marked N/A if the Program is staffed 100% by State employees.

68. Has the Cooperative Agreement Program Manager (CA PM) at the State/Territory level been properly appointed by the USPFO?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 1-4e(8) and 1-4h(1).

Inspected Item: DD Form 577. Note: This is the Federal Program Manager.

69. Has the Cooperative Agreement Program Manager (CA PM) at the State/Territory received Cooperative Agreement Training within the first year of appointment?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 1-4h(2).

Inspected Item: Certificate of training. Note: This is the Federal Program Manager.

70. Has the Cooperative Agreement Program Manager (CA PM) at the State/Territory level completed related CA training (i.e. Fiscal Law or Finance training) as directed by the TAG/USPFO?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph1-4 h(3) and DoDFMR Volume 14, Chapter 2, Section 020401, paragraph B3.

Inspected Item: Certificate of completion/attendance. Note: If the TAG/USPFO has determined a specific frequency of training for the CA PM this must be documented in writing. The Inspected item will reflect this frequency. If there is no documented TAG/USPFO requirement, then the DoDFMR requirement for training every three years applies. Note: This is the Federal Program Manager.

71. Does the Federal Program Manager adequately manage In-Kind Assistance?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 10-4a, 11-7 (a)-(b) and NGYCP-CA Section 406c.

Inspected Item: Verify request for IKA and supporting documentation.

72. Did the USPFO conduct joint reviews no less than tri-annually with the YC Program Director, Federal Program Manager, Grants Officer Representative and Grantee (State) Financial Representative to ensure contractual and financial compliance?

Ref: NG PAM (AR) 37-1 Chapter 5-3c, DFAS-IN 37-1 Chapter 27, Section 270801, DoDFMR Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 0804 and NGYCP-CA Attachment 1, Section 1-26e4A(4).

Inspected Item: Validate that the reconciliation process is documented, detailed, and allows for a timely closure of NGYCP-CA.

73. Is the Program in compliance with internal control reporting procedures?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 4-2a. b(4) and AR 11-2 paragraph 2-7e.

Inspected Item: See questions 73a-73c below.

Note: This is not the Corrective Action Plan created in response to the Program’s previous CORE inspection.

73a. Have all internal and external findings/weaknesses been identified and reported to the Accessible Unit Manager (AUM) or Internal Control Administrator (ICA), and USPFO?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 4-2b(4).

Inspected Item: Obtain copies of internal and external control findings. Coordinate with the USPFO and his representatives to ensure they are aware of these findings.

73b. Has the AUM or ICA developed corrective actions and milestone dates for all internal and external previous findings?

Ref: AR 11-2 paragraph 2-7e, and NGR 5-1 paragraph 4-2b(4).

Inspected Item: Obtain a copy of the Program’s action plan. Assess corrective actions, are they reasonable? Are the milestones timely and attainable?

73c. Have the corrective actions been implemented?

Ref: AR 11-2 paragraph 2-7f.

Inspected Item: Ask for documentation of tasks completed.

74. Has the USPFO properly appointed a Grants Officer Representative in writing?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraphs 1-4e(7) and 2-2a(2).

Inspected Item: See questions 74a-74e below.

74a. Does the appointment letter define the scope and limitations of the GOR’s authority?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2b(1)-(4).

Inspected Item: Appointment letter.

74b. Does the appointment letter specify the extent and limitations of the GOR's authority to act on behalf of the Grants Officer?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2b(1).

74c. Does the appointment letter indicate if he/she has the authority to work all agreements or specific agreements only?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2b(2).

74d. Does the appointment letter state that the appointment is not redelegable?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2b(3).

74e. Does the appointment letter specify the appointment period covered (specific begin and end date or indefinite)?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2b(4).

75. Does the Grants Officer Representative (GOR) appointment comply with applicable regulations?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2a(1) and 2-2c.

Inspected Item: See questions 75a-75c below.

75a. Did the GOR acknowledge the appointment in writing?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2c.

75b. Was a copy of the appointment distributed to all parties within the State/Territory concerned with the cooperative agreement?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2c.

Inspected Item: Proof of distribution indicating recipients and date.

75c. Is the GOR a Federal employee?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2a(1).

Inspected Item: Proof of employment status.

76. Has the Grants Officer Representative completed the required training within the first year of appointment to the position?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-2g.

Inspected Item: See questions 76a- 76b below.

76a. Has the GOR attended the GOR training within the first year of appointment?

Inspected Item: Dated GOR training certificate.

76b. Has the GOR attended the Fiscal Law training within the first year of appointment?

Inspected Item: Dated Fiscal Law training certificate.

77. Has the GOR completed the Cooperative Agreement training course?

Inspected Item: Dated Cooperative Agreement training certificate.

78. Has the GOR properly completed and distributed the NGYCP-CA?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3a(1).

Inspected Item: See questions 78a-78d below.

78a. Has the GOR completed the NGYCP-CA using the format provided on the NGB-PARC-A website?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3a(1)(a).

Inspected Item: Completed Agreement.

78b. Has the GOR coordinated the staffing of or obtained required legal signatures?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3a(1)(b).

78c. Has the GOR ensured the CA has all required signatures?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3a(1)(c).

78d. Has the GOR distributed the agreement to all concerned parties?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraphs 2-3a(1)(d) and 3-4c(2).

79. Does the Grants Officer Representative maintain a file for the Youth ChalleNGe Program?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3a.

Inspected Item: Separate file for the Youth ChalleNGe Program.

80. Does the Grants Officer Representative maintain a current reference library containing the publications outlined in NGR 5-1, paragraph 2-3b?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3b.

Inspected Items:: Reference library including the following publications at a minimum: (1) NGR 5-1, (2) Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Part 33 (DODGARS 3210.6R), hereinafter referred to as 32 CFR 33, (3) Title 2 Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 225, hereinafter referred to as 2 CFR Part 225, (4) DoDI 4000.19. Note: Electronic versions are acceptable.

81. Does the Grants Officer Representative use the DoD Assistance Award Action (DAADS) Report System within 15 days of award?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 10-2c.

Inspected Item: GOR will log onto DAADS. If access to DAADS cannot be made, Inspected item is a print out from DAADS that shows the input of awards, modifications and that they were entered within 15 days of being awarded.

82. Was Program Income reported in DAADS as the non-Federal dollars amount?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 10-4c.

Inspected Item: GOR will log onto DAADs or produce DAADs print out.

Note: Program Income cannot be reported as Federal assistance dollars.

84. Does the Grants Officer Representative distribute agreements, grants, and policy letters?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3d.

84. Has the Grants Officer ensured that adequate Cooperative Agreement management controls are in place to protect the Federal government’s interests in their State/Territory?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 4-2b.

Inspected Item: Guidance memos, emails that show communication from the GOR requiring the completion of risk inspections and management control check lists. Note: USPFO-IR capabilities can assist in this responsibility.

85. Does the Grants Officer Representative (GOR) properly maintain records?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3e(1)-(3).

Inspected Item: See questions 85a-85c below.

85a. Has the Grants Officer instructed the GOR as to the type of records they are to maintain and distribute?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3e(1).

Inspected Item: Memorandum, appointment letter or SOP.

85b. Does the NGYCP-CA file contain the minimum required documentation?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3a(2) and (3).

Inspected Item: Ensure the following items are contained within the files. (2) Each MCA file must, as a minimum, include:

(a) A copy of the grants officer's letter of designation.

(b) A copy of the GOR’s appointment memorandum and any other documentation describing the GOR's duties and responsibilities.

(c) The original, executed MCA and all documentation supporting the MCA.

(d) Copies of modifications to the MCA, if applicable and all documentation supporting the modification.

(e) Documentation of all actions in support of the agreement.

85c. Are the records numbered and labeled IAW AR 25-400-2, The Army Records Information Management System (ARIMS)?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3e(2).

Inspected Item: Ensure the records are labeled and numbered IAW ARIMS.

86. Once a cooperative agreement has been closed out, has the GOR forwarded all records pertaining to the agreement to the Grants Officer for retention?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3e(3).

Inspected Item: Access to closed cooperative agreements, filing instructions, and/or filing SOP

87. Are all cooperative agreement records retained for 6 years and 3 months after the final payment or settlement date?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 2-3e(3).

Inspected Item: Review close out files.

88. If any litigation, claim, negotiation, audit or other action involving the cooperative agreement records is started before the expiration of the six years and three months, have the records been retained until completion of the action and resolution of all issues or until the end of the regular six years and three months, whichever is later?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 3-16b.

Inspected Item: Interview with GOR and review affected records.

89. Have cooperative agreement modifications complied with regulatory guidance?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 3-11b.

Inspected Item: See questions 89a-89d below.

89a. Have all requests for funding modifications of a cooperative agreement been initiated by the Cooperative Agreement Program Manager and provided to the GOR for action?

Inspected Item: Review supporting documents for funding modifications. Note: The initiator is the Federal PM.

89b. Have all modifications that obligate or de-obligate funds against a cooperative agreement been signed by the Grantee (State) and Grantor?

Inspected Item: Review modifications.

89c. Have requests for a modification increase included a certification of funds availability by the Grantee (State)?

89d. Have requests for a modification decrease included approvals required by the CA?

90. Has the GOR verified the host installation is properly charging the Program for actual costs? (Recommended) Ref: CP 3-1, Chapter 1, 3B Inspected Item: See questions 90a-90e below.

90a. If applicable, does an agreement between the Program and the host installation specify the scope and limitations for all parties concerned?

Inspected Item: Review documentation.

90b. Is the Program only charged for actual utilities consumed?

Ref: CP 3-1, Chapter 1, 3B.

90c. Is the Program only charged for actual costs for maintenance and repair cost?

90d. Is the Program only charged for actual costs for supplies for maintenance and repair?

90e. Is the Program only charged for the direct cost of installation employees providing operational support to ChalleNGe facilities or activities based on actual time spent by employees?

91. Has the USPFO-IR conducted an audit of the Program or review (full or partial) of the Program at least every three years?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 4-3c and NGYCP-CA Section 620c.

Inspected Item: Signed and dated audit results.

92. Is the Program included as part of the USPFO Internal Review Auditable Entity File?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 4-2b(2).

Inspected Item: Copy of the USPFO-IR auditable entity file.

93. Has the USPFO and Adjutant General (Grantee) conducted a risk assessment?

Ref: NGR 5-1 paragraph 4-2b(1).

Inspected Item: Completed risk inspection.

Note: The USPFO Internal Review capabilities can assist in this responsibility.

RM Compliance Checklist Effective 161001