OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

U.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Grants 

Awarded to the State of Alabama,

Department of Conservation and Natural

Resources, Marine Resources Division, 

From October 1, 2016, Through

September 30, 2018, Under the Wildlife 

and Sport Fish Restoration Program

AUDIT

This is a revised version of the report prepared for public release.

In recognition of Secretarial Order No. 3380, we are providing estimated costs 

associated with certain work products. Applying a formula involving prior salary and 

benefit expenses, we estimate the cost of preparing this report to be $85,000. 

Report No.: 2019-ER-053 July 2020
OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

U.S.DEPARTMENT Of THE INTERIOR 

Memorandum 

To: Aurelia Skipwith 

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

From: Nicki Miller 

Regional Manager, Eastern Region 

Subject: Final Audit Report – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Grants Awarded to the State 

of Alabama, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine 

Resources Division, From October 1, 2016, Through September 30, 2018, Under 

the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program 

Report No. 2019-ER-053 

This final report presents the results of our audit of costs claimed by the Alabama 

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources Division (Department), 

under grants awarded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) through the Wildlife and

Sport Fish Restoration Program. We conducted this audit to determine whether the Department 

used grant funds and State fishing license revenue for allowable fish activities and complied with 

applicable laws and regulations, FWS guidelines, and grant agreements. The audit period 

included claims totaling $5.1 million on 23 grants that were open during the State fiscal years 

that ended September 30, 2017, and September 30, 2018. 

We found that the State generally ensured that grant funds and State fishing license 

revenue were used for allowable fish activities and complied with applicable laws and

regulations, FWS guidelines, and grant agreements. We noted, however, the Marine Resources 

Division purchased items with grants funds that were unallowable, and we questioned $3,112 

($2,334 Federal share) in ineligible costs associated with these purchases. We also found that the 

Department overdrew $5,164 ($3,873 Federal share) from a grant because the Department failed 

to appropriately report program income. We further determined the Department did not comply 

with Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 requirements by not reporting 

subawards greater than $25,000 on USASpending.gov. 

We provided a draft of this report to the FWS. The FWS concurred with all five 

recommendations and will work with the Department to implement corrective actions. The full 

responses from the Department and the FWS are included in Appendix 4. In this report, we 

summarize the Department’s and FWS Region 2’s responses to our recommendations, as well as 

our comments on their responses. We list the status of the recommendations in Appendix 5. 

Please provide us with a corrective action plan based on our recommendations by 

October 28, 2020. The plan should provide information on actions taken or planned to address 

Office of Audits, Inspections, and Evaluations | Herndon, VA 
the recommendations, as well as target dates and titles of the officials responsible for 

implementation. Please address your response to me and submit a signed PDF copy to 

aie_reports@doioig.gov. 

The legislation creating the Office of Inspector General requires that we report to 

Congress semiannually on all audit reports issued, actions taken to implement our 

recommendations, and recommendations that have not been implemented. 

If you have any questions regarding this report, me at 202-208-5745. 

cc: Leopoldo Miranda, Regional Director, Region 2, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

2 
Contents 

Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 

Objective ....................................................................................................................................1 

Background................................................................................................................................1 

Results of Audit ...............................................................................................................................2 

Questioned Costs—$8,276 ($6,207 Federal Share)...................................................................2 

WSFR Program Deficiency .......................................................................................................4 

Recommendations Summary ...........................................................................................................6 

Appendix 1: Scope and Methodology..............................................................................................9 

Appendix 2: Sites Visited ..............................................................................................................12 

Appendix 3: Monetary Impact.......................................................................................................13 

Appendix 4: Responses to Draft Report ........................................................................................14 

Appendix 5: Status of Recommendations......................................................................................19 
Introduction 

Objective 

In June 2016, we entered into an intra-agency agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(FWS) to conduct audits of State agencies receiving grant funds under the Wildlife and Sport 

Fish Restoration Program. These audits fulfill the FWS’ statutory responsibility to audit State 

agencies’ use of these grant funds. 

We conducted this audit to determine whether the Alabama Department of Conservation and 

Natural Resources, Marine Resources Division (Department), used grant funds and State fishing 

license revenue for allowable fish activities and complied with applicable laws and regulations, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife (FWS) guidelines, and grant agreements. See Appendix 1 for details 

about our scope and methodology. See Appendix 2 for sites we visited. 

Background 

The FWS provides grants to States1 through its Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program 

(WSFR) for the conservation, restoration, and management of wildlife and sport fish resources. 

In addition, WSFR supports activities related to hunting and sport fishing, such as hunter 

education programs and boating access projects. 

WSFR was established by the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act and the DingellJohnson Sport Fish Restoration Act.2 The Acts and related Federal regulations allow the FWS to 

reimburse grantees a portion of eligible costs incurred under WSFR grants—up to 75 percent for 

States and 100 percent for the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, 

American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands. The reimbursement amount is called the 

Federal share. The Acts require that hunting and fishing license revenue be used only for 

allowable fish and wildlife activities. In addition, Federal regulations require States to account 

for any income earned from grant-funded activities and to spend this income before requesting 

grant reimbursements. 

1 The Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program defines the term “State” to include the District of Columbia, the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands. 

2 Formally known, respectively, as the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, 16 U.S.C. § 669, as amended, and the Federal 

Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act, 16 U.S.C. § 777, as amended. 

1 
Results of Audit 

We determined that the State generally ensured that grant funds and State fishing license revenue 

were used for allowable fish activities and complied with applicable laws and regulations, FWS 

guidelines, and grant agreements. We note the following exceptions: 

• Questioned Costs. We questioned $3,112 ($2,334 Federal share) as ineligible for 

unallowable purchases because the items purchased only promoted the Department and 

were not directly related to the WSFR grant purpose. We also determined $5,164 ($3,873 

Federal share) to be ineligible because the Department failed to expend program income 

before drawing down WSFR grant funds, resulting in an excess reimbursement. 

• WSFR Program Deficiency. The Department did not comply with Federal regulations 

that require it to report subawards greater than $25,000 on USASpending.gov. 

See Appendix 3 for a statement of monetary impact. 

Questioned Costs—$8,276 ($6,207 Federal Share) 

Ineligible Other Direct Costs Charges—Questioned Costs of $2,334 

In order to be eligible for reimbursement under WSFR, grant expenses must be reasonable, 

allowable, allocable, and adequately support the grant agreement. The Marine Resources 

Division purchased ineligible items with funds from Grant Nos. F16AF01319 and F17AF01289 

that were not directly related to the grants’ intended purpose, which is to enhance the public’s 

appreciation for the marine environment and fishing regulations. The Marine Resources Division 

spent $3,112 (Federal share $2,334) on polo shirts and boots (see Figure 1). The polo shirts 

contained only an embroidered Alabama Marine Resources Division logo and nothing promoting 

WSFR. Likewise, we found the boots, which ranged in cost from $103 to $133 a pair, to be of no 

promotional value to the WSFR program. As a result, we questioned other direct costs totaling 

$2,334 (Federal share). 

Title 2 C.F.R. § 200.421(e)(4) states that unallowable advertising and public relations costs are 

those designed solely to promote the non-Federal entity. 

Because there were no written policies and procedures to inform personnel how to determine 

whether items should be charged to WSFR grants, the staff did not know the shirt and boot 

purchases were ineligible. Using grant funds for these purchases reduced the effect of the grant 

because it left fewer funds available for its intended purposes. 

2 
876 

Figure 1: Federal Share of Questioned Costs Related to Other Direct Costs 

Ineligible 

Questioned Costs 

Grant No. Grant Title Items ($) 

Coastal Alabama Outreach and F16AF01319 Polo shirts 1,458 Education 

Coastal Alabama Outreach and F17AF01289 Boots Education 

Total $2,334 

Source: Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources 

Division. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the FWS: 

1. Resolve the questioned costs related to other direct costs totaling $3,112 

($2,334 Federal share) 

2. Require the Department to develop written policies and procedures to ensure 

grant costs claimed are eligible, allowable, and reasonable charges to WSFR 

Excess Reimbursement—Questioned Costs of $3,873 

The Department overdrew on Grant No. F15AF01359 because it failed to expend program 

income of $5,164 (Federal share $3,873) generated through the Artificial Reef Permits Program 

before the final draw of the grant was made. Because the Department did not report all its 

program income before the grant was closed, it received a larger amount of Federal 

reimbursement. 

Title 2 C.F.R. § 200.307(e)(1) states that program income the non-Federal entity did not 

anticipate at the time of the Federal award must be used to reduce the Federal award and 

non-Federal entity contributions rather than to increase the funds committed to the project. 

Further, the regulation states that program income must be used for the current cost unless the 

Federal awarding agency authorizes otherwise. 

The Department’s central accounting employee, who was responsible for the Department’s 

drawdown process, did not consult with the Alabama Marine Resources Division accountant to 

see if any program income was generated during the grant period, and so did not report it 

appropriately. As a result, the Department failed to appropriately report all its program income 

generated during the grant period, violating Federal regulations. Further, because the Department 

3 
did not properly credit the grant with program income totaling $5,164 (Federal share $3,873), it 

overdrew Federal funds for Grant No. F15AF01359 (see Figure 2). 

Figure 2: Federal Share of Questioned Costs Related to Excess Reimbursement 

Ineligible 

Questioned Costs 

Grant No. Grant Title ($) 

Enhancement of Recreational Fishing in F15AF01359 3,873 Coastal Alabama 

Total $3,873 

Source: Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine 

Resources Division. 

Recommendations 

We recommend that the FWS: 

3. Require the Department to implement controls that ensure program income is 

properly accounted for and reported 

4. Resolve the questioned costs related to the excess reimbursement totaling 

$5,164 ($3,873 Federal share) 

WSFR Program Deficiency 

Inadequate Oversight of Subrecipients 

We found that the Department did not comply with Federal regulations related to subawards. 

It did not report all subawards greater than $25,000 on USASpending.gov, a website intended to 

promote Government transparency under the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 

2014. Specifically, we found that seven subawards issued through four grants awarded in fiscal 

years 2017 and 2018 were not reported on USASpending.gov (see Figure 3). Auburn University 

and South Alabama, pass-through entities, received all seven subawards to conduct fish research. 

Title 2 C.F.R. § 200.330 requires that subrecipient and contractor determinations must occur 

when the recipient decides to issue Federal awards to a pass-through entity. In accordance with 

Title 2 C.F.R. § 170.220(a), Federal grantees must report each subaward action that obligates 

$25,000 or more in Federal funds on www.fsrs.gov. This information is then posted in 

USASpending.gov. 

We found that the Department’s guidance in place during the audit period did not state that 

personnel must report subawards greater than $25,000 on www.fsrs.gov. Failure to report such 

4 
subawards created a lack of transparency to the public regarding the use of Federal funds. In 

August 2019, the Department updated policies and procedures to include this process; however, 

it still does not include clear guidance to satisfy the requirement to post subawards in excess of 

$25,000 to USAspending.gov. 

Figure 3: Grants With Subawards Not Reported, Violating Federal Requirements 

Subrecipients Grant No. Federal Share ($) 

Auburn University F16AF00207 149,894 

University of South Alabama 51,175 

Auburn University F17AF00123 200,000 

University of South Alabama 64,640 

Auburn University F18AF00230 250,610 

University of South Alabama 63,025 

Auburn University F18AF00231 89,151 

Total $868,495 

Source: Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, 

Marine Resources Division. 

Recommendation 

We recommend that the FWS: 

5. Require the Department to report all prior subawards of more than $25,000 

and implement controls to ensure compliance with Federal regulations in the 

future 

5 
Recommendations Summary 

We recommend that the FWS: 

1. Resolve the questioned costs related to other direct costs totaling $3,112 ($2,334 Federal 

share) 

Department Response 

The Department concurred with the finding and will work with the FWS to resolve the 

recommendation. 

FWS Response 

The FWS concurred with the finding and will work with the Department to develop a 

corrective action plan. 

OIG Comment 

Based on the responses from the Department and the FWS, we consider the 

recommendation resolved but not implemented. 

2. Require the Department to develop written policies and procedures to ensure grant costs 

claimed are eligible, allowable, and reasonable charges to WSFR 

Department Response 

The Department did not concur with the finding or recommendation. The Department 

explained that policies and procedures were in place at the time to ensure grant costs 

claimed were eligible, allowable, and reasonable charges to WSFR, but staff did not 

follow the policy. It stated that all staff would be made aware of these policies and 

instructed to follow them going forward. 

FWS Response 

The FWS concurred with the finding. 

OIG Comment 

Based on the responses from the Department and the FWS, we consider the 

recommendation resolved and implemented. However, the Department’s updates to the 

policy were implemented after the first invoice in question was received and paid in June 

2017. The Department told us that updates to the policy to ensure grant costs claimed are 

eligible, allowable, and reasonable, were implemented in December 2017. Therefore, 

6 
there was no specific policy in place at the time of the June 2017 purchase. This policy 

was further revised August 2019 and is sufficient support to close this recommendation. 

3. Require the Department to implement controls that ensure program income is properly 

accounted for and reported 

Department Response 

The Department concurred with the finding and will work with the FWS to resolve the 

recommendation. 

FWS Response 

The FWS concurred with the finding and will work with the Department to develop a 

corrective action plan. 

OIG Comment 

Based on the responses from the Department and the FWS, we consider the 

recommendation resolved but not implemented. 

4. Resolve the questioned costs related to the excess reimbursement totaling $5,164 ($3,873 

Federal share) 

Department Response 

The Department concurred with the finding and will work with the FWS to resolve the 

recommendation. 

FWS Response 

The FWS concurred with the finding and will work with the Department to develop a 

corrective action plan. 

OIG Comment 

Based on the responses from the Department and the FWS, we consider the 

recommendation resolved but not implemented. 

5. Require the Department to report all prior subawards of more than $25,000 and 

implement controls to ensure compliance with Federal regulations in the future 

Department Response 

The Department concurred with the finding and will work with the FWS to resolve the 

recommendation. 

7 
FWS Response 

The FWS concurred with the finding and will work with the Department to develop a 

corrective action plan. 

OIG Comment 

Based on the responses from the Department and the FWS, we consider the 

recommendation resolved but not implemented. 

8 
Appendix 1: Scope and Methodology 

Scope 

We audited the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources 

Division’s (Department’s) use of grants awarded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) 

under the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program (WSFR). The audit period included 

claims totaling $5.1 million on 23 grants that were open during the State fiscal years (SFYs) that 

ended September 30, 2017, and September 30, 2018. 

Methodology 

We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government 

auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions 

based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis 

for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

We assessed whether internal control was significant to the audit objective. We determined that 

the Department’s control activities and related principles were significant to the audit objective. 

• Management should design control activities to achieve objectives and respond to risks. 

• Management should design the entity’s information system and related control activities 

to achieve objectives and respond to risks. 

• Management should implement control activities through policies. 

We tested the operation and reliability of internal controls over activities as related to our audit 

objective. Our tests and procedures included: 

• Examining the evidence that supports selected expenditures charged to the grants by the 

Department 

• Reviewing transactions related to purchases, direct costs, drawdowns of reimbursements, 

in-kind contributions, and program income 

• Interviewing Department employees to ensure that personnel costs charged to the grants 

were supportable 

• Inspecting equipment and other property 

• Determining whether the Department used fishing license revenue for the administration 

of fish and wildlife program activities 

9 
• Determining whether the State passed required legislation assenting to the provisions of 

the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act and the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish 

Restoration Act 

• Evaluating State policies and procedures for assessing risk and monitoring subawards 

• Visiting sites throughout the State (see Appendix 2 for a list of sites visited) 

We found deficiencies in internal controls resulting in our three findings of ineligible other direct 

cost charges, excess reimbursement, and inadequate oversight of subrecipients. 

Based on the results of our initial assessments, we assigned a level of risk and selected a 

judgmental sample of transactions for testing. We used auditor judgement and considered risk 

levels relative to other audit work performed to determine the degree of testing performed in 

each area. Our sample selections were not generated using statistical sampling, and therefore we 

did not project the results of our tests to the total population of transactions. 

This audit supplements, but does not replace, the audits required by the Single Audit Act 

Amendments of 1996. Single audit reports address controls over Statewide financial reporting, 

with emphasis on major programs. Our report focuses on the administration of the Alabama fish 

and wildlife agency, and that agency’s management of WSFR resources and license revenue. 

Alabama provided computer-generated data from its official accounting system and from 

informal management information and reporting systems. We tested the data by sampling 

expenditures and verifying them against WSFR reports and source documents, such as purchase 

orders, invoices, and payroll documentation. Our testing was limited to the data sampled; 

therefore, we did not assess the reliability of the accounting system. 

Prior Audit Coverage 

OIG Audit Reports 

We reviewed our last two audits of costs claimed by the Department on WSFR grants,3 from 

2010 and 2015. We followed up on four recommendations from these reports and found that the 

U.S. Department of the Interior’s Office of Policy, Management and Budget considered all 

recommendations resolved and implemented. 

3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sport Fish Restoration Program Grants Awarded to the State of Alabama, Department of 

Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources Division, From October 1, 2007, Through September 30, 2009 (R-GRFWS-0010-2010), dated August 2010. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sport Fish Restoration Program Grants Awarded to the State of Alabama, Department of 

Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources Division, From October 1, 2012, Through September 30, 2014 (2015-

EXT-042), dated January 2016. 

10 
State Audit Reports 

We reviewed the single audit reports for SFYs 2017 and 2018 to identify control deficiencies or 

other reportable conditions that affect WSFR. In those reports, the Schedule of Expenditures of 

Federal Awards indicated $12.1 million (combined) in Federal expenditures related to WSFR, 

but did not include any findings directly related to WSFR, which was not deemed a major 

program for Statewide audit purposes. Neither of these reports contained any findings that would 

directly affect the program grants. 

11 
Appendix 2: Sites Visited 

Headquarters Montgomery 

Dauphin Island Fisheries Offices Gulf Shores 

Fish Hatcheries Claude Peteet Mariculture Center 

Bay Watch Boat Ramp 

Billygoat Hole Ramp 

Boggy Point Boat Ramp 

Cotton Bayou 

Boating Access Facilities Delta Port Marina 

Ft. Morgan Boat Ramp 

Little Billygoat Hole Ramp 

The Pines Boat Launch 

View Point Launch 

Subrecipients Auburn University 

12 
Appendix 3: Monetary Impact 

The audit period included claims totaling $5.1 million on 23 grants that were open during the 

State fiscal years that ended September 30, 2017, and September 30, 2018. We questioned 

$3,112 ($2,334 Federal share) of other direct costs as ineligible. We found that the Alabama 

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources Division, did not report 

program income earned on a grant during the audit period, resulting in an excess reimbursement 

of $5,164 ($3,873 Federal share). We questioned costs totaling $8,276 ($6,207 Federal share) as 

ineligible, and found no controls in place to ensure program income was captured and reported 

properly. 

Monetary Impact: Federal Share of Questioned Costs 

Ineligible 

Questioned 

Grant No. Grant Title Cost Category Costs ($) 

F16AF01319 Coastal Alabama Outreach 

and Education 

Other Direct 

Costs 1,458 

F17AF01289 Coastal Alabama Outreach 

and Education 

Other Direct 

Costs 876 

F15AF01359 Enhancement of Recreational 

Fishing in Coastal Alabama Drawdown 3,873 

Total $6,207 

Source: Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources 

Division. 

13 
Appendix 4: Responses to Draft Report 

The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources Division’s, 

response to our draft report, which includes the FWS’ response, follows on page 15. 

14 
United States Department of the Interior 

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 

1875 Century Blvd 

Atlanta, Georgia 30345 

June 11, 2020 

IN REPLY REFER TO: 

FWS/R2/R4/WSFR 

Nicki Miller, Regional Manager, Eastern Region 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Office of Inspector General 

381 Elden Street, Suite 3000 

Herndon, VA 20170 

Re: Draft Audit Report – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Grants Awarded to the State of 

Alabama, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources 

Division, From October 1, 2016, Through September 30, 2018 Under the Wildlife 

and Sport Fish Restoration Program. Report No. 2019-ER-053, Issued 04/27/2020 

Dear Ms. Miller: 

The enclosed response to the draft audit report referenced above was developed by the State of 

Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Marine Resources Division, in 

cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service South Atlantic - Gulf and Mississippi Basin 

Unified Regions Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program. 

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Alex Coley at 

(404) 679-7242. 

Sincerely, 

MARILYN 

LAWAL

Digitally signed by 

MARILYN LAWAL 

Date: 2020.06.11 

15:48:06 -04'00'

Marilyn H. Lawal-Carter, Acting Manager 

Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 

Enclosure 

Cc: Ord Bargerstock, Shuwen Cheung 

Division of Financial Assistance Support and Oversight 

15
 

Response to Draft Report 

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 

WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAM 

Grants Awarded to the State of Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural 

Resources, Marine Resources Division 

From October 1, 2016, Through September 30, 2018 

Report No. 2019-ER-053, Issued April 27, 2020 

Auditor Recommendation 1 

The auditors recommend that the FWS resolve the questioned costs related to other direct costs 

totaling $3,112 ($2,334 Federal share). 

Agency Response 

The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources agrees with the finding and 

will recharge the unallowable expenses to state funds reducing grant expenditures by $1,944 

($1,458 Federal Share) related to F16AF01319. We will offset a current draw to return the 

federal funds. The unallowable costs related to F17AF01289 $1,168 ($876 Federal share) will be 

replaced with expenditures which were overmatch on the grant. State overmatch was $7,605. 

This will result in no payback for this item of unallowable expense. 

Contact Person: , Division Accountant 

Anticipated Completion Date: 7/31/2020 

Service Response 

The Service concurs with the auditor’s finding. 

Auditor Recommendation 2 

The auditors recommend that the FWS require the Department to develop written policies and 

procedures to ensure grant costs claimed are eligible, allowable, and reasonable charges to 

WSFR. 

Agency Response 

The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources disagrees with the assertion 

that it did not have written policies and procedures to ensure grant costs claimed are eligible, 

allowable, and reasonable charges to WSFR. We had policies that we developed in December 

2017 and further revised in August 2019. We will ensure that all staff are made aware of these 

policies and are instructed to follow them. 

16
 

 

 

Contact Person: , Accounting Director 

Anticipated Completion Date: 7/31/2020 

Service Response 

The Service concurs with the auditor’s finding. 

Auditor Recommendation 3 

The auditors recommend that the FWS require the Department to implement controls that ensure 

program income is properly accounted for and reported. 

Agency Response 

The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources agrees with the finding and 

has subsequently implemented the requirement that the Marine Resources Division accountant 

review and approve the Federal financial reports prior to submission on all Federal grants for that 

Division. 

Contact Person: , Accounting Director 

Anticipated Completion Date: 7/31/2020 

Service Response 

The Service concurs with the auditor’s finding. 

Auditor Recommendation 4 

The auditors recommend that the FWS resolve the questioned costs related to the excess 

reimbursement totaling $5,164 ($3,873 Federal share). 

Agency Response 

The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources agrees with the finding and 

will recharge the unallowable expenses to state funds reducing grant expenditures by $5,164 

($3,873 Federal share). We will offset a current draw to return the federal funds. 

Contact Person: , Division Accountant 

Anticipated Completion Date: 7/31/2020 

Service Response 

The Service concurs with the auditor’s finding. 

17
 

Auditor Recommendation 5 

The auditors recommend that the FWS require the Department to report all prior subawards of 

more than $25,000 and implement controls to ensure compliance with Federal regulations in the 

future. 

Agency Response 

The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources agrees with the finding and 

implemented a plan in November 2018 to capture and report all subawards more than $25,000. 

We retroactively reported all subawards back to 10/1/2017. 

Contact Person: , Accounting Director 

Anticipated Completion Date: 7/31/2020 

Service Response 

The Service concurs with the auditor’s finding. 

18
2 

Appendix 5: Status of Recommendations 

Recommendation Status Action Required 

Resolved and implemented No action is required. 

1, 3 – 5 

Resolved but not 

implemented: 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(FWS) regional officials 

concurred with these 

recommendations and will 

work with staff from the 

Alabama Department of 

Conservation and Natural 

Resources to develop and 

implement a corrective 

action plan. 

Complete a corrective action 

plan that includes information 

on actions taken or planned to 

address the recommendations, 

target dates and titles of the 

officials responsible for 

implementation, and 

verification that FWS 

headquarters officials reviewed 

and approved the actions the 

State has taken or planned. 

We will refer the 

recommendations not 

implemented at the end of 90 

days (after October 28, 2020) 

to the Assistant Secretary for 

Policy, Management and 

Budget to track 

implementation. 

19 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Report Fraud, Waste, 

and Mismanagement 

Fraud, waste, and mismanagement in 

Government concern everyone: Office 

of Inspector General staff, departmental 

employees, and the general public. We 

actively solicit allegations of any 

inefficient and wasteful practices, fraud, 

and mismanagement related to 

departmental or Insular Area programs 

and operations. You can report 

allegations to us in several ways. 

By Internet: www.doioig.gov 

By Phone: 24-Hour Toll Free: 

Washington Metro Area: 

800-424-5081 

202-208-5300 

By Fax: 703-487-5402 

By Mail: U.S. Department of the Interior 

Office of Inspector General 

Mail Stop 4428 MIB 

1849 C Street, NW. 

Washington, DC 20240