(The following was excerpted from an article in the Federal Grants Management Handbook.) Prime recipients monitoring their subrecipients’ internal control risks should treat even minor concerns seriously because they could eventually become more significant if not addressed early.

Upon turning on my computer Tuesday, I immediately typed in SAM.gov to find out what the new System for Award Management website would hold in store. The Government Services Administration, which is administering the site, had touted that it would launch May 29. Unfortunately it appears that it is mission aborted, for now.

(The following was excerpted from an article in the Federal Grants Management Handbook.) A Federal Highway Administration policy expected by the end of the year will call for a review of state bidding and contract awarding procedures to ensure states encourage competition for grant-funded transportation projects. The policy stems from a recent Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General report that found a lack of contract competition for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act highway projects.

(This guest post was written by Nancy Connor and originally appeared on Thompson's education blog, Title I-Derland.) Charter schools represent a growing concern to me because all of our 30+ charter schools are considered to be public schools under the umbrella of my district as the sponsoring LEA.  That means, of course, that we are responsible for their compliance with all of the federal funding they receive.   In the district “single audit” for the 2010-11 school year, three of the eight federal award findings were the result of non-compliance in charter schools.  None were significant enough to constitute material weaknesses, but they do raise a very large issue:  What is sufficient monitoring oversight  in schools that consider themselves largely independent of district practices and do not use our financial system?

It seems that I’ve been spending a lot more time with our webinar team these days. With so much going on in the grants management and single audit arena lately, we’ve been conferring on a routine basis on how to complement the coverage in our publications with interesting and informative webinars that will continue to make Thompson your preferred resource for information.

(The following was excerpted from an article in the Federal Grants Management Handbook.) The Food and Nutrition Service is sponsoring demonstration projects in six states aimed at enabling low-income children to directly receive free school meals based on Medicaid information.

I had been so focused in my blog post Tuesday on the upcoming release of the OMB Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement and the deadline for NIH grantee waivers for Recovery Act funding extensions that I forgot about another key event slated for the end of this month. The Government Services Administration plans to launch the System for Award Management (SAM) on May 29.

If you are a recipient of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act award funding from the National Institute of Health and you expect to continue spending funds past September 2013, your deadline for submitting a waiver to do so is fast approaching.

(The following was excerpted from an article in the Single Audit Information Service.) Wisconsin health officials plan to issue guidance addressing out-of-state FoodShare benefits transactions after a state auditor’s office (SAO) report expressed concern that some households within the state may have used their benefits inappropriately.

June 21 — mark the date on your calendar. Why, you ask? Because this is when the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants hosts its annual Not-For-Profit Industry Conference in Washington, D.C. What’s so special about that? Well, not only is the conference an excellent opportunity to learn about the latest events in the audit community, it traditionally has been what I like to call the unofficial deadline for the Office of Management and Budget to issue the Circular A-133 Compliance Supplement.