We are counting down the final hours of 2015 and preparing for a bright new 2016! It will be interesting to see what changes are in store for grant applicants and recipients next year. Maybe next year won’t be quite as challenging as the last couple of years with all the changes we’ve experienced under the Office of Management and Budget’s uniform grant guidance, but who knows what we shall expect.

(The following was excerpted from a recent article in the Single Audit Information Service.) The New York Department of Health is updating the functionality of its Medicaid information system to enable state auditors to better review applicant eligibility and enrollment information. In a recent audit, the New York Office of State Comptroller (OSC) said that the system was not capable of providing auditors with information they needed to determine applicant eligibility, and the health department did not provide them with useful data as an alternative.

(The following was excerpted from a recent article in the Single Audit Information Service.) A recent Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Inspector General audit found that the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) eGrants system lacked adequate security because it did not provide controlled access to individual grant recipients. Moreover, the inspector general added that FEMA’s proposed corrective action to address the deficiency still was insufficient to effectively strengthen system security.

Research grantees now have updated federal guidance to use when administering their grant programs. Late last month, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) revised its NIH Grants Policy Statement, and the National Science Foundation (NSF) posted its revised Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide.

(The following was excerpted from a recent article in the Federal Grants Management Handbook.) The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) uniform grant guidance requires federal agencies and pass-through entities to clearly define the intended performance outcomes of recipients and subrecipients. Speaking recently to attendees at the Council for Resource Development’s (CRD’s) annual conference in Washington, D.C., Toni DeMaglio, coordinator of grants support and effectiveness at Seminole State College in Sanford, Fla., stressed the importance of this provision when a pass-through partners with other entities.

This came across our desks recently and serves as a perfect example of what NOT to do as a grant recipient. According to the Department of Justice (DOJ), the University of Florida has agreed to pay almost $19.9 million to settle allegations that the university improperly charged the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for salary and administrative costs on hundreds of federal grants.