DOJ OIG: Ramsey County COPS Grant Audit Finds $273,011 in Questioned Costs

The U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (DOJ OIG) released an audit on July 7, 2026 examining whether Ramsey County, Minnesota complied with federal award conditions for a $2,965,000 Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Technology and Equipment Program grant.

The audit focuses on how the county bought and documented equipment, how it handled grant financial reporting, and whether it gave the COPS Office proper notice when related funding overlapped.

What DOJ OIG audited

DOJ OIG Audit Report 26-068 reviewed compliance for the COPS Technology and Equipment Program award covering emergency communications equipment, including radio-related upgrades and generator replacements or upgrades. The audit period ran from March 1, 2024 to January 31, 2026.

What DOJ OIG says went wrong

1) Generator procurement: sole-source contract raised award-condition compliance problems. The audit says Ramsey County did not comply with applicable award-condition expectations for how the generators were procured. Based on that compliance gap, the audit reports $273,011 in questioned unallowable costs tied to the generator contract.

2) Single-audit and SEFA reporting: timeliness and completeness issues. DOJ OIG states that the most recent single audit reporting was not submitted on time and that the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for the COPS award omitted $636,179 in federal expenditures associated with the COPS grant.

3) Federal financial reporting / drawdown controls lacked clear, written processes. The audit describes weaknesses in the county’s processes and internal controls used for federal financial reporting and drawdowns, including issues tied to coordination and oversight for those steps.

4) Duplicative funding notice: DOJ OIG says the COPS Office was not informed. The audit says Ramsey County did not notify the COPS Office about duplicative funding related to the award during the award period, including overlaps connected to planned generator purchases and related budget changes.

Who is responsible for fixing it?

DOJ OIG included four recommendations to the COPS Office—reflecting that grant oversight depends on both recipient controls and federal verification. The recommendations (as described in the audit) focus on things like strengthening guidance and recipient-facing compliance tools, improving controls to ensure single-audit/SEFA completeness and timeliness, addressing remediation steps tied to the $273,011 questioned costs, and ensuring official notice when funding becomes duplicative.

Why this matters for taxpayers and grant managers nationwide

This audit shows how federal grant accountability often turns on the paperwork and controls—not just the end-purpose of a project. DOJ links recipient expectations to the type of procurement documentation, reporting accuracy, and internal controls described in DOJ award guidance and the government-wide Uniform Requirements framework.

What to watch next: whether the COPS Office accepts and implements DOJ OIG’s recommendations, how Ramsey County addresses the questioned-cost and reporting issues, and whether improved procedures prevent omissions like SEFA gaps and late single-audit submission.

Sources

• Oversight.gov (CIGIE) DOJ OIG audit landing page (Report No. 26-068)
• 2 CFR Part 200 Uniform Requirements (OJP overview)