U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE 

COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 

FINAL REPORT: 

Administration of Payments Received 

Under the Help America Vote Act by the 

Pennsylvania Bureau of Commissions, 

Elections and Legislation 

JANUARY 1, 2006 THROUGH JULY 31, 2010 

Report No. 

E-HP-PA-10-10 

May 2011 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION
 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
 

1201 New York Ave. NW - Suite 300
 

Washington, DC 20005
 

May 6, 2011 

Memorandum 

To:	 Thomas Wilkey 

Executive Director 

From:	 Curtis W. Crider 

Inspector General 

Subject:	 Final Audit Report - Administration of Payments Received Under the Help America 

Vote Act by the Pennsylvania Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation 

(Assignment Number E-HP-PA-10-10) 

We contracted with the independent certified public accounting firm of Clifton Gunderson 

LLP (Clifton Gunderson) to audit the administration of payments received under the Help America 

Vote Act (HAVA) by the Pennsylvania Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation (BCEL). 

The contract required that the audit be done in accordance with U.S. generally accepted government 

auditing standards. Clifton Gunderson is responsible for the attached auditor’s report and the 

conclusions expressed therein. 

In its audit of the BCEL, Clifton Gunderson concluded that the BCEL generally accounted 

for and expended HAVA funds in accordance with the HAVA requirements and complied with the 

financial management requirements established by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. 

However, the audit disclosed that the BCEL failed to maintain adequate property records over 

HAVA funded equipment, possessed unexpended Section 102 funds after the deadline and lacked 

certifications for payroll expenditures. 

In its December 8, 2010, response to the draft report (Appendix A-1), the BCEL agreed with 

the report’s findings and recommendations, which they confirmed in a March 23, 2011 response to 

the draft report (Appendix A-2). 

On April 7, 2011, the EAC response (Appendix A-3) indicated general agreement with the 

report findings and recommendations, and stated that they would work with the state to ensure 

corrective action. . We would appreciate being kept informed of the actions taken on our 

recommendations as we will track the status of their implementation. Please respond in writing to 

the finding and recommendation included in this report by July 6, 2011. Your response should 

include information on actions taken or planned, targeted completion dates, and titles of officials 

responsible for implementation. 

The legislation, as amended, creating the Office of Inspector General (5 U.S.C. § App.3) 

requires semiannual reporting to Congress on all audit reports issued, actions taken to implement 

audit recommendations, and recommendations that have not been implemented. Therefore, this 

report will be included in our next semiannual report to Congress. 

If you have any questions regarding this report, please call me at (202) 566-3125. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PERFORMANCE AUDIT REPORT
	

ADMINISTRATION OF PAYMENTS RECEIVED
	

UNDER THE
	

HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT
	

BY THE
	

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

January 1, 2006 Through July 31, 2010
	

UNITED STATES ELECTION
	

ASSISTANCE COMMISSION
	

a1
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

BACKGROUND 2

AUDIT OBJECTIVES 3

SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 4

AUDIT RESULTS 4

APPENDICES

Appendix A-1: Secretary of State Response to Audit Results 8

Appendix A-2: Secretary of State Response to Draft Report 10

Appendis A-3: U. S. Election Assistance Commission Response to Audit Results 13

Appendix B: Audit Methodology 14

Appendix C: Monetary Impact as of July 31, 2010 16

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

............................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................................

.................................................................................................

.......................................................................................................................

...............................................

...............................................

............................................................................................

..........

...............................................................
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission
	

Performance Audit of the Administration of Payments Received Under the
	

Help America Vote Act by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
	

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Clifton Gunderson LLP was engaged by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC or the 

Commission) Office of Inspector General (OIG) to conduct a performance audit of the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation (BCEL) for 

the period January 1, 2006 through July 31, 2010 to determine whether the BCEL used 

payments authorized by Sections 101, 102, and 251 of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 

(HAVA or the Act) in accordance with HAVA and applicable requirements; accurately and 

properly accounted for property purchased with HAVA payments and for program income, and 

met HAVA requirements for Section 251 funds for an election fund and for a matching 

contribution. In addition, we were engaged to conduct a performance audit of the election fund 

receipts from April 15, 2003 to December 31, 2005. 

The EAC OIG conducted a performance audit of BCEL’s expenditures, but not the receipts, of 

the HAVA program from inception through December 31, 2005, and issued a report dated 

January 10, 2007. We have reviewed BCEL’s corrective actions with respect to the findings and 

recommendations included in the EAC OIG report. We found that the recommendations have 

been implemented. 

Our audit did not include a determination that the BCEL met the requirements for maintenance 

of a base level of state outlays, commonly referred to as Maintenance of Expenditures (MOE). 

On June 28, 2010, the Commission issued a revised definitive policy on the requirements for the 

MOE. The policy included a provision that the states will have 12 months from the date of the 

revised policy to voluntarily submit a revised MOE plan to the EAC. Accordingly, our scope of 

audit did not include a determination of whether the SBOE and its subgrantees met the 

requirements for MOE. 

In addition, the Commission requires states to comply with certain financial management 

requirements, specifically: 

•	 Comply with the Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative 

Agreements with State and Local Governments (also known as the “Common Rule”) as 

published in the Code of Federal Regulations 41 CFR 105-71. 

•	 Expend payments in accordance with cost principles for establishing the allowance or 

disallowance of certain items of cost for federal participation issued by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) in Circular A-87, Cost Principles for State, Local, and 

Indian Tribal Governments. 

•	 Submit detailed annual financial reports on the use of Title I and Title II payments. 

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 the audit objectives. Because of inherent 

limitations, a study and evaluation made for the limited purposes of our review would not 

necessarily disclose all weaknesses in administering HAVA payments. 

1
	
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Except for the maintenance of adequate property records over HAVA funded equipment, the 

Commonwealth’s possession of unexpended Section 102 funds after the deadline and 

uncertified payroll expenditures, as discussed below, our audit concluded that the BCEL 

generally accounted for and expended HAVA funds in accordance with the requirements 

mentioned above for the period from January 1, 2006 through July 31, 2010. The exceptions 

needing BCEL’s management attention are as follows: 

1.		 Inventory listings of voting equipment did not conform to the requirements of 41 C.F.R. 105-

71.132 (d)(1), (the Common Rule) at the seven counties we visited. Various required 

information were missing from the listings, including serial or ID number, source of property, 

who holds title, location, acquisition date, condition of property, cost, and percentage of 

federal participation in the cost. 

2.		 The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania possesses approximately $19,000 unobligated Section 

102 funds that have not been returned to the EAC. The unobligated funds were additional 

funds awarded in error for six non-compliant precincts. 

3.		 The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania charged a total of $1,304,378.42 in salary and benefits 

expenditures to the HAVA election fund during the period of January 1, 2006 through July 

31, 2010. Of this amount we question $18,125.25 (11 pay periods at a biweekly rate of 

$1,647.75) because the BCEL did not properly document the salaries as required by OMB 

Circular A-87. 

We have included in this report as Appendix A-1 the BCEL management’s formal responses to 

the findings and recommendations received December 8, 2010, which were confirmed as still 

applicable and current in management’s response to the draft report dated March 23, 2011 

(Appendix A-2). Although we have included management’s written responses to our notices of 

findings and recommendations, such responses have not been subjected to the audit procedures 

and, accordingly, we do not provide any form of assurance on the appropriateness of the 

responses or the effectiveness of the corrective actions described therein. BCEL officials agreed 

with our recommendations and provided corrective action. 

The draft report, including the SOS responses, was provided to the Executive Director of the 

EAC for review and comment. The EAC responded on April 7, 2011, and generally agreed with 

the report’s findings and recommendations. The EAC stated that they would work with the state 

to ensure appropriate corrective action. The EAC’s complete response is included as Appendix 

A-3. 

BACKGROUND 

HAVA created the Commission to assist states and insular areas with the improvement of the 

administration of Federal elections and to provide funds to states to help implement these 

improvements. HAVA authorizes payments to states under Titles I and II, as follows: 

•	 Title I, Section 101 payments are for activities such as complying with Title III of HAVA for 

uniform and nondiscriminatory election technology and administration requirements, 

improving the administration of elections for Federal office, educating voters, training 

election officials and poll workers, and developing a state plan for requirements 

payments. 

•	 Title I, Section 102 payments are available only for the replacement of punch card and 

lever action voting systems. 

2
	
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

•	 Title II, Section 251 requirements payments are for complying with Title III requirements 

for voting system equipment; and for addressing provisional voting, voting information, 

statewide voter registration lists, and voters who register by mail. 

Title II also requires that states must: 

•	 Have appropriated funds “equal to 5 percent of the total amount to be spent for such 

activities [activities for which requirements payments are made].” [Section 253(b) (5)]. 

•	 “Maintain the expenditures of the state for activities funded by the [requirements] payment 

at a level that is not less than the level of such expenditures maintained by the state for 

the fiscal year ending prior to November 2000.” [Section 254 (a) (7)]. 

•	 Establish an election fund for amounts appropriated by the state “for carrying out the 

activities for which the requirements payment is made,” for the Federal requirements 

payments received, for “such other amounts as may be appropriated under law,” and for 

“interest earned on deposits of the fund.” [Section 254 )(b)(1)]. 

AUDIT OBJECTIVES 

The objectives of our audit were to determine whether the Pennsylvania Bureau of 

Commissions, Elections and Legislation: 

1.	 Used payments authorized by Sections 101, 102, and 251 of HAVA in accordance with 

HAVA and applicable requirements; 

2.	 Accurately and properly accounted for property purchased with HAVA payments and for 

program income; 

3.	 Met HAVA requirements for Section 251 funds for an election fund and for a matching 

contribution except for the requirements for maintenance of a base level of state outlays, 

commonly referred to as Maintenance of Expenditures (MOE). On June 28, 2010, the 

Commission issued a revised definitive policy on the requirements for the MOE. The 

policy included a provision that the states will have 12 months from the date of the 

revised policy to voluntarily submit a revised MOE plan to the EAC. Accordingly, our 

scope of audit did not include a determination of whether the SBOE and its subgrantees 

met the requirements for MOE. 

In addition to accounting for HAVA payments, the Act requires states to maintain records that 

are consistent with sound accounting principles that fully disclose the amount and disposition of 

the payments, that identify the project costs financed with the payments and other sources, and 

that will facilitate an effective audit. The Commission requires states receiving HAVA funds to 

comply with certain financial management requirements, specifically: 

1.	 Comply with the Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative 

Agreements with State and Local Governments (also known as the “Common Rule”) as 

published in the Code of Federal Regulations at 41 CFR 105-71. 

2.	 Expend payments in accordance with cost principles for establishing the allowance or 

disallowance of certain items of cost for federal participation Issued by the OMB. 

3
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

                 

              

                               

                                                                         

                                                    

                                

                              

                                            

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Submit detailed annual financial reports on the use of Title I and Title II payments.1 

1 EAC requires states to submit annual reports on the expenditure of HAVA Sections 101, 102, and 251 funds. 

Through December 31, 2008, for Sections 101 and 102, reports were due on February 28 for the activities of the 

previous calendar year, and, for Section 251, reports were due by March 30 for the activities of the previous fiscal 

year ending on September 30. Beginning in calendar year 2009, all reports will be effective as of September 30, 

20XX for the fiscal year ended that date and will be due by December 31, 20XX. 

SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 

We audited the HAVA funds received from April 15, 2003 through July 31, 2010, and disbursed 

from January 1, 2006 through July 31, 2010. 

Funds received and disbursed by the HAVA program from inception, April 15, 2003, through 

July 31, 2010 (88-month period) are shown in the following table: 

FUNDS RECEIVED

TYPE OF 

PAYMENT

EAC

PAYMENT

PROGRAM

INCOME

STATE

MATCH

INTEREST

EARNED

TOTAL

AVAILABLE

FUNDS

DISBURSED

DATA
 

AS OF 
 

Section 101 $ 11,323,168 $ 0 $ 0 $1,297,839 $ 12,621,007 $11,713,314 7/31/2010

Section 102 22,916,952 0 0 4,866,180 27,783,132 3

3 The Commonwealth has remaining Section 102 funds in the amount of $19, 157.94 with the balance of funds being 

interest earned to date. The interest earned that remains in the Section 102 fund, is being made available for Section 

251 purposes per EAC advisory 05-003. 

25,071,047 7/31/2010

Section 251 109,775,381 0 11,538,698 2

2 The Commonwealth did not deposit its state match into the election fund. Instead, it considered expenditures for its 

state-funded Statewide Voter Registration System as satisfying its state match. 

15,761,070 137,075,149 104,855,293 7/31/2010

Total $144,015,501 $ 0 $11,538,698 $21,925,089 $ 177,479,288 $141,639,654 7/31/2010

Our audit methodology is set forth in Appendix B. 

AUDIT RESULTS 

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 the audit objectives. Because of inherent 

limitations, a study and evaluation made for the limited purposes of our review would not 

necessarily disclose all weaknesses in administering HAVA payments. 

Except for the maintenance of adequate property records over HAVA funded assets, the 

Commonwealth’s possession of unexpended Section 102 funds after the deadline, and 

uncertified payroll expenditures, our audit concluded that the BCEL generally accounted for and 

expended HAVA funds in accordance with the requirements mentioned above. The BCEL has 

taken action to resolve the exceptions described below as set forth in Appendix A: 

4
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. Property Records for HAVA Funded Equipment 

The property inventory listings from the counties selected for testing did not conform to the 

requirements of 41 C.F.R. 105-71.132 (d)(1), (the Common Rule). The property inventory 

listings did not include required elements such as a serial or ID number, source of property, who 

holds title, location, acquisition date, condition of property, cost, and percentage of federal 

participation in the cost. 

The Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State 

and Local Governments 41 CFR § 105-71.132(d)(1), referred to as the Common Rule, states 

that: 

property records must be maintained that include a description of the property, a serial 

number or other identification number, the source of property, who holds the title, the 

acquisition date, cost of the property, percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the 

property, the location, use and condition of the property, and any ultimate disposition data 

including the date of disposal and sale price of the property. 

Recommendation: 

1. We recommend that the BCEL ensure that the property records at the counties include the 

minimum information required by the Common Rule. 

BCEL’s Response: 

BCEL officials concurred with the finding and recommendation and stated that the Department 

of State has implemented new policies, procedures and remedial action to ensure that the 

counties comply with the Common Rule for maintaining adequate property inventories. 

In their response to the draft report, BCEL officials stated that all of the counties had provided 

updated inventories that complied with the common rule. Also, they have implemented 

procedures to remind the counties of the requirement to maintain current inventories when 

additional federal funds are distributed. 

II. Unexpended Section 102 Funds 

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania possesses unexpended and unobligated Section 102 

funds of $19,157.94 that have not been returned to the EAC. The unobligated funds were 

additional funds awarded in error for six non-compliant precincts. 

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania submitted an initial application for Section 102 funds to 

cover 7,179 non-compliant precincts. A revised application was submitted by the 

Commonwealth one day later correcting the number of non-compliant precincts to 7,173. 

However, the Commonwealth was awarded and received Section 102 funds based on the initial 

application with the erroneous larger number of precincts. As a result, the Commonwealth 

erroneously received additional funding of $19,157.94. This amount represents the total 

amount of additional funds received due to the errors in the application. 

5
	
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recipients of Section 102 funds were to replace punch card and lever voting systems by 

November 2, 2004, unless a state filed for a waiver with GSA under HAVA Section 102(a)(3)(B). 

States that received a waiver from GSA had until the first federal election in the state in 2006 to 

replace the voting systems. On May 25, 2007, Congress extended the deadline for the use of 

Section 102 funds to the date of the first federal election held in the state after March 1, 2008. The 

extension applies only to those states that received a waiver of the 2004 date. The 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania filed a waiver on January 23, 2003 and received an April 22, 

2008 deadline for compliance and expenditure of HAVA Title I, Section 102 funds. 

States that have not replaced punch card or lever voting systems or that possess unobligated 

funds after the applicable Section 102 deadline must return the funds to the EAC. HAVA Section 

104(c) Use of Returned Funds and Funds Remaining Unexpended for Requirements Payments 

states: 

(1) In General.—The amounts described in paragraph (2) shall be transferred to the 

Election Assistance Commission (established under title II) and used by the 

Commission to make requirements payments under part 1 of subtitle D of title II. 

(2) Amounts Described.—The amounts referred to in this paragraph are as follows: 

(A) Any amounts paid to the Administrator by a State under section 102(d)(1). 

(B) Any amounts appropriated for payments under this title which remain unobligated 

as of September 1, 2003. 

Recommendation: 

2. We recommend that the EAC work with the BCEL to return to EAC all unobligated Section 

102 funds and interest. 

BCEL’s Response: 

BCEL officials concurred with the finding and recommendation and proposed to return the funds 

plus interest upon receiving appropriate instruction from the EAC. 

In their response to the draft report, BCEL officials stated that work had begun on returning the 

Section 102 funds to the EAC, and the project is expected to be completed by the deadline set 

by EAC of November 5, 2011. 

III. Uncertified Payroll Expenditures 

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania charged a total of $1,304,378.42 in payroll expenditures to 

the HAVA election fund during the period from January 1, 2006 through July 31, 2010. Of this 

amount, we question $18,125.25 (11 pay periods at a biweekly rate of $1,647.75) which is the 

salary from January 1, 2006 through June 5, 2006 of one employee. The employee’s name was 

not included on the semi-annual certification indicating that he worked only on HAVA related 

activities. 

6
	
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

**************************************** 

OMB Circular A-87, in Attachment B Section 8(h) (3) requires that: 

Where employees are expected to work solely on a single federal award or cost objective, 

charges for their salaries and wages will be supported by periodic certifications that the 

employees worked solely on that program for the period covered by the certification. 

These certifications will be prepared at least semi-annually and will be signed by the 

employee or supervisory official having firsthand knowledge of the work performed by the 

employee. 

Recommendation: 

3. We recommend that the EAC work with the DOS to determine the appropriate corrective 

action regarding the lack of periodic payroll certifications. 

BCEL’s Response: 

BCEL officials stated that the employee’s name was omitted from the certification in error, and 

provided a corrective action, including documentation from appropriate officials confirming that 

the employee worked solely on HAVA activities during the period in questions. 

We provided a draft of our report to the appropriate individuals of the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania’s BCEL, and the United States EAC. We considered any comments received 

prior to finalizing this report. 

The EAC responded on April 7, 2011, and generally agreed with the report’s findings and 

recommendations. The EAC stated that they would work with the state to ensure appropriate 

corrective action. The EAC’s complete response is included as Appendix A-3. 

CG performed its work between August 30, 2010 and September 17, 2010. 

a1

Calverton, Maryland 

October 12, 2010 

7
	
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 

17120 

EXECUTIVE DEPUTY SECRETARY 

March 23,2011 

Mr. Curtis Crider 


Inspector General 


U.S. Election Assistance Commission 


1202 New York Avenue, NW Suite 300 


Washington, D.C. 20005 


Dear Mr. Crider: 

Thank you for your February 18 letter and the opportunity to review the draft audit report 

from the EAC for PelUlsylvania's HAVA audit for the period January 1, 2006 July 31, 2010. 

We have reviewed the report and our previous responses which are included within the report. 

Our initial responses are still applicable and CUll'ent. Attached are two additional updates since 

our initial responses in December 2010. 

Please direct future correspondence related to this audit to Ian Harlow, Deputy 


Commissioner, Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation, at 717-772-4444 or 


iharlow@state.pa.us. 


Thank you again for the opportunity to review the draft audit. 

Sincerely, 

Attachment 
Additional Pennsylvania Response to HAVA Audit for the Period January 1, 2006 through 

July 31, 2010 

Submitted March 23,2011 

NFR#I, Propeliy Management 

As indicated in the revised procedures for monitoring of county property records, the 

Commonwealth ofPennsylvania has required all ofits 67 counties to provide updated propeliy 

inventories to be submitted on the approved Commonwealth format by January 15, 2011. All of 

these updated inventories have been received, reviewed and accepted as providing the 

information required by the Common Rule. 

On an ongoing basis, BCEL is now notifying P A co'mties ofthe requirement to maintain a 

current inventory as new federal funds are disbursed to purchase additional property. 

NFR#2, Compliance 

The Commonwealth has begun work to close out its Title I, Section 102 Account and expects to 

complete the project by the November 5, 2011 deadline set by the Election Assistance 

Commission. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix A-2 

Note:		 The following responses to the Notices of Findings and Recommendations were 

accompanied by various documentation supporting the corrective actions proposed. 

The attachments are not included in this Appendix, but are available to the EAC upon 

request. 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
	

Department of State
	

Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation
	

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN 

NFR #1: 

AUDIT AREA: Property Management 

CFDA No. 90.401 – Help America Vote Act Requirements Payments 

CFDA No. 39.011 – Title I, Section 101 and 102 Funds 

Condition: The property inventory records selected for testing provided by the counties of the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania did not conform to the requirements of 41 C.F.R. 105-

71.132(d)(1),(the Common Rule). The auditors noted that various required information, 

including serial or ID number, source of property, who holds the title, location, acquisition date, 

condition of the property, cost, and percentage of federal participation in the cost were missing 

from the property inventory records. 

CORRECTIVE ACTION STEPS 

Pennsylvania’s Department of State 

(1) The Department of State has revised procedures for monitoring of county property 

records. The new procedures will implement more rigorous monitoring by the Bureau of 

Commissions, Elections and Legislation’s Division of Help America Vote Act. Please 

see the revised procedures included with this response. 

(2) The Department will take a more proactive approach to ensure submission of property 

inventories. As requests for payment are processed, counties will be reminded to update 

property inventories by the Division of HAVA at the time it approves requests and again 

by the HAVA Fiscal Division as requests for payment are posted to the Pennsylvania 

Treasury Department for disbursement of payments. 

(3) Remedial Action Procedures have been developed for the property inventory 

requirements in the event counties fail to comply with the requirements. Please see the 

Remedial Action Procedures included with this response. 

Pennsylvania’s Counties 

(1) The Department has established formal procedures for ensuring proper recording of 

county property funded in whole or in part by Federal Help America Vote Act grant 

funds pursuant to the Common Rule. 

(2) The Department prepared Help America Vote Act Program Advisory No. 2010-4 that 

was sent to each county’s Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Contacts. This advisory 

outlines the new procedures established for the inventory of HAVA property records. 

(3) The Department of State has prepared a new spreadsheet for collection of the inventory 

data. Effective immediately, all counties are required to provide inventory records using 

the new format. Inventories in other formats will be returned to the counties for 

correction. A copy has been provided with this response. 

(4) All Pennsylvania counties have been requested to provide revised inventories using the 

new Excel spread sheet (See sample attached). Counties must provide a copy of the 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
	

Department of State
	

Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation
	

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN 

NFR #2: 

AUDIT AREA: Compliance 

CFDA No. 39.011 – Title I, Section 102 Funds 

Condition: The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania possesses approximately $19,000 in 

unobligated HAVA Section 102 funds that have not been returned to the Election Assistance 

Commission (EAC). The unobligated funds were additional funds awarded in error for six noncompliant precincts. 

CORRECTIVE ACTION STEPS 

(1) The Commonwealth received Section 102 funds based on 7,179 non-compliant county 

precincts as of the November 2000 election. The correct number of non-compliant 

precincts as of that election was 7,173 (a difference of 6 precincts). The amount of 

$19,157.94 which was awarded in error was not disbursed via grant agreements to 

Pennsylvania counties. This amount and any interest earned on the funds while in the 

Commonwealth’s account were held pending receipt of specific instructions from the 

EAC. 

(2) Once the Department of State receives instructions for the return of the funds from the 

EAC, pursuant to HAVA Section 104(c), the Department will begin preparations to 

return the funds awarded in error to Pennsylvania along with interest earned on that 

amount. Interest earned will be calculated based on the date of receipt of the funds in 

April 2003 through the current date. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
	

Department of State
	

Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation
	

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN 

NFR #3 

AUDIT AREA: Payroll Charges 

CFDA No. 90.401 – Help America Vote Act Requirements Payments 

CFDA No. 39.011 – Title I, Section 101 

Condition: The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania charged a total of $1,304,378.42 in payroll 

expenses to the HAVA election fund during the period of January 1, 2006 through July 31, 2010. 

Of this amount, $18,125.25 (11 pay periods at a biweekly rate of $1647.75) is the salary of one 

employee for the period of January 1, 2006 through June 5, 2006. The employee’s name was not 

included on the semi-annual certification indicating that he worked only on HAVA related 

activities. 

CORRECTIVE ACTION STEPS 

Chet Harhut, the employee whose salary is in question was working solely in the position of 

Chief of the Division of Help America Vote Act during the period in question. His name was 

omitted in error because at the time that the certification was prepared, Mr. Harhut was no longer 

serving in that position. The Department of State is providing the following documentation to 

resolve this finding: 

1.		 A certification by Mr. Harhut, supporting the salary charged to the HAVA election fund 

for the period in question confirmed by Harry A. VanSickle, Deputy Secretary of 

Administration for the Department of State. 

2.		 To establish the time period in which Mr. Harhut served as Chief of the Division of 

HAVA we are providing two appointment letters from Harold J. Conrad, former Human 

Resource Director for the Department of State. One establishes the date of Mr. Harhut’s 

promotion from an Administrative Officer 1 position as a HAVA Specialist to an 

Administrative Officer 2 position as Chief of the Division of HAVA. This letter is dated 

November 7, 2005 and establishes that Mr. Harhut’s term as Chief began effective 

October 29, 2005. 

The second letter from Mr. Conrad, dated June 6, 2006, documents Mr. Harhut’s 

promotion from Chief of the Division of HAVA (Administrative Officer 2 position) to 

Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation 

(Administrative Officer 4). The promotion became effective June 3, 2006 and establishes 

the end of Mr. Harhut’s term as Chief of the Division of HAVA. 

3.		 A Human Resources Employment Data Report for Mr. Harhut which shows employment 

data for the period in question. 
EAC RESPONSE TO THE DRAFT AUDIT: 

OIG Performance Audit Report on the Administration of 

Payments Received Under the Help America Vote Act by the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, for the Period January 1, 

2006 Through July 31, 2010. 

April 7, 2011 

MEMORANDUM 

To: Curtis Crider 

Inspector General 

Thomas R. Wilkey 


Executive Director 


Subject: 	 Draft Performance Audit Report - "Administration of Payments 

Received Under the Help America Vote Act by the Commonwealth 

of Pennsylvania". 

Thank you for this opportunity to review and respond to the draft audit report for 

Pennsylvania. 

The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) generally concurs with the results of 

the review and recommendations. The EAC will work with the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania Bureau of Commissions, Elections and Legislation (BCEL) to 

ensure appropriate corrective action. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix B 

AUDIT METHODOLOGY 

Our audit methodology included: 

•	 Assessing audit risk and significance within the context of the audit objectives. 

•	 Obtaining an understanding of internal control that is significant to the administration of the 

HAVA funds. 

•	 Understanding relevant information systems controls as applicable. 

•	 Identifying sources of evidence and the amount and type of evidence required. 

•	 Determining whether other auditors have conducted, or are conducting, audits of the 

program that could be relevant to the audit objectives. 

To implement our audit methodology, below are some of the audit procedures we performed: 

•	 Interviewed appropriate BCEL employees about the organization and operations of the HAVA 

program. 

•	 Reviewed prior single audit report and other reviews related to the state’s financial 

management systems and the HAVA program for the last 2 years. 

•	 Reviewed policies, procedures and regulations for the BCEL’s management and accounting 

systems as they relate to the administration of HAVA programs. 

•	 Analyzed the inventory lists of equipment purchased with HAVA funds. 

•	 Tested major purchases and supporting documentation. 

•	 Tested randomly sampled payments made with the HAVA funds. 

•	 Verified support for reimbursements to local governments (counties, cities, and 

municipalities). 

•	 Reviewed certain state laws that impacted the election fund. 

•	 Examined appropriations and expenditure reports for state funds used to meet the five 

percent matching requirement for section 251 requirements payments. 

•	 Evaluated compliance with the requirements for accumulating financial information reported 

to the Commission on the Financial Status Reports, Forms SF-269 and 425, accounting for 

property, purchasing HAVA related goods and services, and accounting for salaries. 

•	 Verified the establishment and maintenance of an election fund. 

14 
 

 

 

•	 Conducted site visits of selected counties to perform the following: 

� Observe equipment purchased with HAVA funds for proper accounting and 

safeguarding 

� Ensure compliance with HAVA Act. 

15
	
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix C
	

MONETARY IMPACT AS OF JULY 31, 2010
 

Description 

Questioned 

Costs 

Additional Funds for 

Program 

Semi-annual certifications of full-time 

employment on HAVA activities not filed $18,125 $0 

Excess Sec. 102 funds to be returned to 

EAC 19,158 0 

Total $37,283 $0 

16
	
 

 

 

OIG’s Mission 

The OIG audit mission is to provide timely, high-quality 

professional products and services that are useful to OIG’s clients. 

OIG seeks to provide value through its work, which is designed to 

enhance the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in EAC 

operations so they work better and cost less in the context of 

today's declining resources. OIG also seeks to detect and prevent 

fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement in these programs and 

operations. Products and services include traditional financial and 

performance audits, contract and grant audits, information systems 

audits, and evaluations. 

Obtaining 

Copies of 

OIG Reports 

Copies of OIG reports can be requested by e-mail. 

(eacoig@eac.gov). 

Mail orders should be sent to: 

U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

Office of Inspector General 

1201 New York Ave. NW - Suite 300 

Washington, DC 20005 

To order by phone: Voice: (202) 566-3100 

Fax: (202) 566-0957 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste and Abuse 

Involving the U.S. 

Election Assistance 

Commission or Help 

America Vote Act 

Funds 

By Mail: U.S. Election Assistance Commission 

Office of Inspector General 

 1201 New York Ave. NW - Suite 300 

 Washington, DC 20005 

E-mail: eacoig@eac.gov 

OIG Hotline: 866-552-0004 (toll free) 

FAX: 202-566-0957