organizing electronic responses: Example: Folder/File Naming Convention Review Area/ Document Folder/File Name 1. Program Management 1 Program Management a. Departmental organizational chart 1a Department org chart.docx b. Transit unit/section organizational chart 1b Transit org chart.docx c. State management plans 1c 5311 SMP.docx 1c 5310 SMP.docx 1c 5316 SMP.docx 1c 5317 SMP.docx Review Area/Documentation Desk Review Visit Site Visit Program Management Departmental organizational chart X Unit/section organization chart X State management plans, if updated since 2008 and 2009 X Guidance regarding coordinated public transit-human services transportation plan X Documentation of review of a sample of coordinated plans X Sample coordinated plans X Sample of unified planning work programs (UPWPs) listing coordinated planning efforts X Sample guidance/technical assistance documents X Subrecipient agreement for each program X Oversight materials (reports, compliance checklists, follow up letters/reports) for each program X Oversight files for subrecipients/contractors/lessees to be visited X Programs of projects, if most recent version is not in TEAM-web X Grant application for each program or access to grant management system, if automated X Grant program guides, if applicable X Approved plans for allocating costs between rural and urban service X Section 5310 subrecipients' certifications that no non-profits are readily available in the area to provide the service X
REVIEW PREPARATION 1. Program Specific Reviews Please comment on the status of open deficiencies and progress on meeting review deadlines. Type of Review Site Visit Dates Draft Report Date Final Report Date Deficiency Close/Due Date Comment Financial Management Oversight (FMO) Full Scope Review NA FMO Follow-Up Review NA FMO Cost Allocation Plan Review NA FMO Agreed Upon Procedures or Special Assignment Review NA Real Estate Review NA Procurement System Review (PSR) NA PSR Follow-Up Review NA
Intercity Bus Certifications Governor’s certifications for 2009 and 2010 EEO Program Update 3/7/2011 Expires 3/7/2014 DBE Program Program was approved on 5/1/2000 DBE Small Business Element 5/25/2012 Conditional approval letter from Region V dated 4/19/2012. Updated SBE plan due to Region V office May 25, 2012 or conditional approval will expire. Status? The revised DBE Program plan was submitted to FHWA and is still in review at FHWA waiting approval. The revised DBE plan is posted to the ODOT website under section 5 Procurement and DBE – as “ODOT DBE Program Plan”. DBE ARRA Quarterly Reports Reports uploaded to TEAM DBE Goals 7/30/2010 Most recent goals in TEAM are for year ending 2011. 2011 goals were published. No evidence of approval or publishing of goals for 2012-13. The goal is due every three years. Our next goal date is 9/30/13. DBE Semi-Annual Reports Reports are current, including ARRA Title VI Program 2/17/11 Program was approved 7/21/11 and expires 2/17/2014 Standard form LLL Charter reports Most recent quarterly charter exception report in TEAM is for one subrecipient in 2nd quarter of 2010 (Lancaster). No other reports submitted since then as of 7/2012. NTD reports Close out letters submitted for 2009, 2010. 2011 report submitted.
What are the dates of the last revisions? 5311 5310 5316 5317 5311 SMP submitted dated June 2012. What is status of final updated 5311 SMP? June 2012 SMP not uploaded into TEAM The June 2012 SMP has been submitted to FTA Region V for approval. Once approved by FTA, the document will be uploaded into TEAM. 6/2009-(Draft) 5/31/12 2/12 2/12 Have the plans been updated since the last State Management Review? Yes See respective dates. Have the plans been updated to incorporate changes in program management or new requirements? Yes Have the plans been updated for new programs or capital projects? Yes Did the state seek public comment for significant revisions to the state management plans? N/A, no significant changes have been made Do the plans address the required areas? [Please complete State Management Plan Contents] Yes Yes Do the coordinated plans for Section 5310, 5316 or 5317 programs contain the required elements? Yes
Section 5310 How does the state define eligible subrecipients under Section 5310? Private nonprofit organizations with Articles of Incorporation on file with the Secretary of State. Governmental entities who are subrecipients in Ohio’s Coordination Projects. Government entities if able to certify that there are no nonprofit corporations readily available in the area to provide the service. Do any governmental authorities receive Section 5310 funds? Please list. If yes: Yes, Madison County Board of MRDD, Madison County Commissioners, Henry County Commissioners, Union County Commissioners, Adams County Commissioners, Coshocton County Commissioners, Morrow County Commissioners, City of Strongsville City of Berea, City of North Royalton, City of Sidney, Have the governmental authorities been approved by the state to coordinate services for elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities or have they certified that no nonprofits are readily available? Yes
Is the distribution of funds fair and equitable? Yes Did the state publish a list of selected projects? Where? Website How does the state define technical capacity for Section 5316 subrecipients? See Ohio Coordination Program/ JARC/New Freedom Project Proposal, Form I, pp. 5-6. How does the state ensure that Section 5316 subrecipients have the technical capacity to carry out the proposed projects? Review of responses to questions mentioned above. Certifications and assurances, on-site visits, training, technical assistance. What are the state’s procedures for monitoring Section 5316 subrecipients to ensure the services delivered continue to be eligible? Screening from proposals, on-site visits, TARs Section 5317 How does the state define eligible subrecipients under Section 5317? See State Management Plan, § D Same as 5316 Did the state publicly advertise the availability of funds and selection criteria? Please describe. Posted on website 1/26/12. Email blast 1/31/12. Press release 3/21/12. Are projects selected using a competitive process? Please describe. See State Management Plan, § F Same as 5316 Is the distribution of funds fair and equitable? Yes
Section 5317 Year 2009 2011 2012 Governor’s small urbanized area apportionment $751,713 $259,795 $881,196 Governor’s nonurbanized area apportionment $1,159,321 $861,519 $1,559,976 Total apportionment $1,911,034 $1,121,314 $2,441,171 Grant number OH-57-X031 OH-57-X038 OH-57-X044 State Administration (FPC 6) $0 $0 $136,304 % of Apportionment 0% 0% 6% Grant Administration Basic Requirement: The state must track and report on the progress of projects, report to the National Transit Database, expend grant funds on time, and close out projects and grants when project activity is completed. Reviewed X Not Applicable Comment: Not Deficient Deficient DEFICIENCIES Not using oldest funds first Data in progress reports and FFRs do not agree Late/incomplete progress reports FFATA reporting deficiencies ARRA reports late/incomplete reports Annual NTD report not submitted
Did the state respond to any comments made by FTA regarding a report? It would be helpful if we could be made aware of the process in TEAM. This could be merely a training issues for relatively new DOT employees working with TEAM. Comments made by FTA in several grants MPR/FFR not responded to by grantee for that particular reporting cycle. Has grantee communicated this need for assistance with TEAM to the Regional Office? We hope to discuss this matter further on-site with FTA during the SMR. What are the procedures for coordinating the development of and reconciling the data in progress reports (MPRs) and FFRs? Each Program Coordinator maintains a spreadsheet and reconciles MPRs and FFRs periodically. At what intervals are they reconciled? Are these procedures written? ARRA FFRs are reconciled quarterly. All other programs are reconciled Internal training was conducted for all program staff when the FSRs changed to FFRs and a spreadsheet was developed for use by the program staff. annually.
Status as of: 3/31/2012 Grant Year of Category C Balance OH-16-X002-02 2008 $15,577 As of 6/19/2009 Revision OH-16-X003-00 2008 $34,729 As 10/26/2011 Revision OH-16-X004-00 2009 $14,214 As 8/12/2011 Update OH-16-X005-00 2009 $0 OH-16-X006-00 2010 $190,801 OH-16-X007-00 2010 $0 OH-18-X-027-01 2007 $241,926 Completion date is 12/31/2010 in 2011 4Q MPR but no revised POP in TEAM. Has POP been revised? Funds allocated? This grant is in process for closeout. The POP will be revised soon. OH-18-X029-00 2008 $0 According to POP, grant is combination of two grants – X028 and X030 OH-18-X030-00 2009 $0 $884,481 in application; no revised POP in TEAM.
Significant civil rights compliance issues Were there any issues since the last review? If yes, please provide summary. All civil rights issues are followed up by the Civil Rights Officers in the Office of Chief Legal and EEO. All issues are closed. What do you mean by “Significant civil rights compliance issues”? We had 3 complaints about subrecipients that have been resolved. Documentation is available on-site. Additional information requested by the regional office N/A Section 5309: Current status of each open ALI within the active/executed grant OH-04-0052-01 - ALI 11300-113210-3 – No revised completion date in MPR Revised date entered – 12/31/13 Narrative description of projects, status, problems encountered in implementation, specification preparation, bid solicitation, resolution of protests, and contract awards Detailed discussion of all budget or schedule changes Dates of expected or actual requests for bid, delivery, etc.
Exhibit 2.2 Status of Open Grants Ohio Department of Transportation – ID: 1225 6/30/2012 Grant Date Executed FPC Year Funds Ap’d TEAM Balance Date of Last Drawdown FFR Unl’d ’s As of 6/30/12 FFR Unob’d Balance As of 6/30/12 Projected Close Date Comment ODOT Response 7/20/2009 00 $67,770 None 0 $67,770 5309--Passenger Shelters and Benches Issues with subrecipient SEAT’s financial situation suspended completion of project. What is current status/plan for drawing down funds? Marianne will discuss SEAT 1/12/2012 00 2010 $2,628,110 3/28/2012 0 $2,628,110 5309 - 2010 OH Rural State of Good Repair 7/15/2009 00 06 2007 2008 $160,774 $14,127 2/23/2012 10/11/2011 $0 $174,901 5310 - 6/26/2009 00 06 $274,915 7/6/2012 $0 $515,330 2009 Section 5310 -Program of Projects. 2007- 02
7/8/2008 06 07 09 2008 $5,610 $28,514 $761,275 2/18/2011 7/6/2012 7/6/2012 $151,241 $786,125 5311 Grant Program for 2009 According to remarks in May 2, 2012 MPR, grant in close out once RTAP funds spent. What about remaining unobligated funds? 8/5/2009 06 07 09 2009 $86 $88,723 4,036,078 6/8/2012 7/6/2012 7/6/2012 $0 $4,204,634 12//31/2012 5311 Grant Program for 2010 Will start closeout in 2013. One project remaining. 8/26/2010 06 07 09 2010 $722,329 $275,515 $5,683,223 7/6/2012 None 7/62012 $0 $6,359,475 5311 Grant Program for 2011 Unspent RTAP 8/25/2011 06 07 09 2011 $600,000 $273,592 $12,887,608 None None 7/6/2012 $0 $15,854,942 5311 Grant Program for CY 2012
What are the state’s procedures for overseeing projects managed by subrecipients? See above Are projects on schedule and on budget? If not, why not? What are the recovery plans for the schedules and budgets? Yes What is the state doing to ensure that funds are expended for ARRA projects by September 30, 2015? Monitoring project activity closely and working to reassign any funds for projects that are completed under budget. Is there a specific position responsible for overseeing ARRA grants management? If so, please identify. Brett Harris Are any projects at risk of not being completed on time? If so, please list and discuss the reasons why. No Is the state’s or a subrecipient’s work force used in the execution of capital grant projects? If yes: Yes-capitalized operating expenses by subrecipients only If the work equals $10,000,000 or more, was a force account plan and justification submitted to FTA? N/A
What procedures does the state use to review these indirect cost rates or to ensure that cost allocation plans have been submitted to a cognizant agency? The subrecipients indirect cost plan is provided to ODOT and reviewed by the Office of Audits for reasonableness and for compliance with A-87. Written approval must be obtained prior to these expenses being eligible for reimbursement. Based on response, does ODOT provide written approval to the subrecipient to charge indirect costs to Federal grant funds in addition to that approval given by a cognizant agency? Are there other subrecipients charging indirect cost rates, and if yes, are their cost allocation plans approved and available for reviewer? What procedures does the state use to monitor that the correct rate is charged by subrecipients for reimbursements? Budget reviewed during application process and during audits. What about payments/reimbursements? Part C: Funds Management What are the state’s procedures for ensuring that and state grant balances agree? The Office of Transit reconciles TEAM grant balances at least quarterly by comparing TEAM reports with ECHO transaction logs. Are there any discrepancies between TEAM-Web and state grant balances? If yes, please identify. No. How is this verified? This is verified through a separate tracking matrix, which shows all open FTA grants and each ECHO transaction. A report is also run from TEAM to verify disbursement information for each open grant by FPC.
Lacking full and open competition for one or more methods of procurement Small business element no submitted and/or implemented Improper use of geographic preferences DBE goal not submitted to FTA Lacking compliant A&E procurement practices DBE goal submission deficiencies No FTA clauses DBE goal public participation process deficiencies Buy America provision not in solicitation and/or contract Uniform DBE reports not submitted semi-annually Contract files lacking Buy America certifications Uniform DBE reports dot not include required information No verification that excluded parties are not participating ARRA-specific DBE reports not submitted correctly Excluded parties participating in covered transactions Goal achievement analysis not completed or not submitted Change order procedures deficiencies Inadequate implementation of DBE contract compliance Procurement quantities in excess of need Grantee does not monitor DBE compliance Improper piggyback purchase Grantee not complying with DBE termination process Contract(s) exceed five year limitation DBE goal achievement analysis not completed or not submitted Pre-award and/or post-delivery audits not performed Inadequate implementation of DBE contract compliance Pre-award and/or post-delivery certifications lacking Grantee not complying with DBE termination process No TVM certification Not participating in a UCP Insufficient oversight of procurement DBE certifications not adequate No approved DBE program Interstate certification deficiencies Inadequate designation of DBE officer DBE directory does not include NAICS codes DBE program not updated Other (Applicable Triennial Review deficiency) Questions FTA Comments State Reponses Reviewer Comments
Policies and Procedures What policies and procedures guide FTA funded procurements conducted by the state? Ohio Revised Code Section 5513 with all provisions of 4220.1F taking precedence when in conflict with Revised Code. See attached ODOT procurement policy and Purchasing and Contract Administration Manual How do these procedures ensure full and open competition? All procurements are posted on the ODOT website, vendor lists are used to contact potential vendors How does the state ensure that those procedures are followed? ODOT uses a Technical Assurance Review process which functions similar to an internal audit. What are the state’s key procurement requirements for: Micro-purchases (please list thresholds) See attached ODOT procurement policy and Purchasing and Contract Administration Manual Small purchases (please list thresholds) See attached ODOT procurement policy and Purchasing and Contract Administration Manual Sealed bids (IFBs) (please list thresholds and types of items procured using this method) See attached ODOT procurement policy and Purchasing and Contract Administration Manual Competitive proposals (RFPs) (please list thresholds and types of items procured using this method) See attached ODOT procurement policy and Purchasing and Contract Administration Manual
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Does the state meet the threshold for a DBE program? Yes. If no, skip to question 26. If yes, has the state’s DBE program been approved by FTA? If no, provide an explanation. Yes. It is approved by FHWA then sent to FTA for review and comment. If yes, has the program been uploaded to TEAM-Web? Yes all changes to program are uploaded into TEAM. Who is the state’s DBE liaison officer (DBELO)? Please list name and position. Megan O’Callaghan, Deputy Director, Division of Construction Management Is this the same organizational position as that detailed in the state’s most recent DBE program? It is currently being To whom does this person report for DBE matters? James Barna, Assistance Director of Transportation Policy Who is the ODOT CEO? Is this a collateral duty assignment? Yes If yes, do potential conflicts exist and how are they identified and resolved? No Does the state have adequate staff to administer the program? Yes
Since the last review, if the state has contract goals, did it award a contract to a firm that did not meet the specified DBE contract goal? Yes How did the state determine if “good faith efforts” were sufficient? The subrecipient must provide all documentation of good faith efforts such as sufficient advertising and promotion of DBE program. That DBE goals are published/advertised. That all DBE requirements are included in the bid documents. Did the state approve of the good faith efforts? Yes What process does the state use to monitor contactors and subrecipients to ensure that DBE obligations are fulfilled? ODOT reviews and concurs on subrecipient contracts with contractor(s). TARs and site visits. Review of DBE goal reports Does this monitoring include monitoring for adherence to prompt payment and return of retainage requirements? Yes.
3. State Contract Rolling Stock Contract 250-10 – Hybrid Light Transit Vehicle-Wide Body (Honeycomb) and Light Transit Vehicle – Wide Body (Fiberglass) 4. IT Contract 501-12 – Transit Online Database of Ohio 5. Design Admin./Maint./Storage Facility Pike County (CATS Facility) - ARRA 6. Rehab. Of Intercity Admin. Facility City of Marion - ARRA 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Exhibit 5.2 Required Third Party Clauses (excluding micro-purchases, except for construction contracts over $2,000) CLAUSE COMMENTS MASTER AGREEMENT REFERENCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LEGEND: X – included; O – not included; NA – does not apply All FTA-Assisted Third-Party Contracts and Subcontracts No Federal government obligations to by use of a disclaimer §2.f
Nonconstruction Activities Nonconstruction employee protection (Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act) Applies to all turnkey, rolling stock and operational contracts (excluding contracts for transportation services) > $100,000 §24.b Transit Operations Transit employee protective arrangements Applies to Section 5307, 5309, 5311 and 5316 projects §24.d Charter service operations §28 School bus operations §29 Drug and Alcohol Testing Safety sensitive functions. Applies to Section 5307, 5309 and 5311 projects §32.b Planning, Research, Development, and Documentation Projects Patent rights §17 Rights in data and copyrights §18
Miscellaneous Special Requirements Disadvantaged business enterprises (DBEs) Contracts awarded on the basis of a bid or proposal offering to use DBEs §12.d Prompt payment and return of retainage Per 49 CFR Part 26, if grantee meets the threshold for a DBE program (for purchases) §12.d Recycled products Contracts for items designated by EPA, when procuring $10,000 or more per year §15.k ADA access Contracts for rolling stock or facilities construction/ renovation §12.g Assignability clause Piggyback procurements §15.a Special Notification Requirements for States Special notification requirements for states §38
Exhibit 5.3 Required Certifications, Reports and Forms (excluding micro-purchases, except for construction contracts over $2,000) REQUIREMENT COMMENTS MASTER AGREEMENT REFERENCES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LEGEND: X – included; O – not included; NA – does not apply Bus testing certification and report Procurements of buses and modified mass produced vans §15.n(4) TVM certifications Procurements of buses and modified mass produced vans §12.d(1) Buy America certification Procurements of steel, iron or manufactured products > $100,000 §14.a Pre-award audit Rolling stock procurements §15.n(3) Pre-award Buy America certification Rolling stock procurements > $100,000 §15.n(3) Pre-award purchaser’s requirements certification Rolling stock procurements §15.n(3) Post-delivery audit Rolling stock procurements §15.n(3) Post-delivery Buy America certification Rolling stock procurements > $100,000 §15.n(3) Post-delivery purchaser’s requirements certification Rolling stock procurements §15.n(3)
On-site inspector’s report Rolling stock procurements > 10 vehicles for areas >200,000 in population and 20 for areas <200,000 in population §15.n(3) Federal motor vehicles safety standards and post-delivery certification Non-rail rolling stock procurements §15.n(3) Excluded Parties Listing System search Procurements > $25,000 §3.d Lobbying certification Procurements exceeding $100,000 §3.d(1) Standard Form LLL and quarterly updates (when required) Procurements > $100,000 where contractor engages in lobbying activities §3.d(1) Asset Management Basic Requirement: The state must maintain control over real property, facilities and equipment and ensure that they are used in transit service. States must keep Federally funded equipment and facilities in good operating order. Reviewed X Not Applicable Comments:
What was the utilization plan for the real property that changed use? NA Part B: Equipment What procedures does the state follow to manage and maintain control over FTA funded equipment and ensure its continued use? Examples: PTMS provides an annual update of condition of each asset. Equipment inventories (Describe. Note data elements tracked, addition/disposition procedures, etc.) PTMS-see section 5 of attached documents Annual vehicle use certifications Periodic reporting of vehicle use [Note frequency, data collected, and whether by vehicle or aggregate] PTMS-includes type of vehicle or equipment; condition, mileage (if vehicle); current estimated value; Retention of or liens on titles All non governmental entities vehicles have liens attached. Disposition requirements All subrecipeint equipment must go through a written disposition process. See Grant Management Procedures. Lease restrictions Productivity standards Site visits Annual Site Visits by ODOT staff Insurance Required minimum insurance in the contract.
What are the state’s procedures for ensuring subrecipients comply with ADA requirements regarding lift and ramp failures on in-service vehicles, and the provision of alternate transportation? Through TARs and site visits. State also provides ADA training periodically. Do any subrecipients provide route deviation service (please list)? Ashtabula County Transportation System, Athens Transit Both systems deviate for all passengers What are the state’s procedures for ensuring that route deviation service provided by subrecipients has the characteristics of demand responsive service, i.e., that the service deviates for people with and without disabilities and the availability of route deviation service is advertised to the public? Through TARs and site visits. Review of brochures and websites with system information. Do any subrecipients provide fixed route service (please list)? Yes. Chillicothe Transit System, Delaware Area Transit Agency, and South East Area Transit. Provide recent TAR reports for these agencies Attached to Website Do they also provide ADA complementary paratransit service? Yes. SEAT provides ADA complementary service, DATA only deviates for disabled Chillicothe does not mention complementary service on its website If not, do the subrecipients provide commuter or “university” service? N/A
What are the state’s procedures for ensuring that commuter service is properly classified and meets the characteristics specified in the DOT ADA regulations? N/A What are the state’s procedures for ensuring that the complementary paratransit service provided by subrecipients meets ADA requirements in the following areas: Through TARs and site visits. Review of brochures and websites with system information. ODOT must review and approve complementary paratransit plans for fixed route service systems. These plans are forwarded to the FTA Regional Office for approval. Adherence to the plan is monitored through the TAR and site visit process. Additionally, any service changes must be reviewed and receive concurrence prior to changing service. All areas not included in TAR See section on Regulatory Compliance, beginning on page 19 of item 1j Technical Assistance Review Questions. Eligibility determinations Through TARs and site visits. Service criteria Through TARs and site visits. Service capacity Through TARs and site visits. Origin-to-destination service Through TARs and site visits. Visitors’ service Through TARs and site visits.
Questions FTA Comments State Responses Reviewer Comments Has the state conducted an analysis of how the four factors in the DOT limited English proficient (LEP) guidance apply to the state’s programs and activities? Yes. See document. What steps has the state taken to ensure meaningful access to the benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs and activities for individuals who are LEP? ODOT LEP document attached. Subrecipients required to submit LEP plans. In the implementation of FTA programs, does the state conduct public outreach and involvement activities? Yes. Document recent outreach to minorities, low income and LEP communities How has the state sought out and considered the viewpoints of minority, low-income, and LEP populations in the course of these activities? Yes. See attached documents. Is this consistent with the state’s approved Title VI program? Yes. How does the state monitor to ensure that subrecipients comply with Title VI requirements? The Office of Equal Opportunity is currently developing a monitoring program. Document implemented monitoring Does this monitoring include MPOs? The monitoring program being developed by the Office of Equal Opportunity will include MPO monitoring.
If convicted of a drug statute violation occurring in the workplace, they are to report such to the employer in writing no later than five days after such a conviction? Yes Has any employee reported a criminal conviction for a drug statute violation that occurred in the workplace? If yes: No. Was such notice timely? N/A Did the grantee provide FTA timely notice of the conviction? N/A What action was taken against personnel that reported such a conviction? N/A Has the state established an ongoing drug-free awareness program? Yes How and how often does the state inform employees of the dangers of drug abuse and any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs? Annually Exhibit 13.1 Drug and Alcohol Policy Checklist The reviewer will examine the policies of the subrecipients to be visited. The reviewer will work with you to select the subrecipients before the site visit.