Subrecipient Monitoring Site Visit Checklist
Use this Subrecipient Monitoring Site Visit Checklist to document on-site oversight of federal subawards, from financial controls and source records to program performance and corrective actions.
Trusted by frontline teams 15 years of frontline software AI customization in seconds
Built for: Nonprofit Grants Management · Higher Education Research Administration · State And Local Government Pass Through Entities · Healthcare And Public Health Grants · Workforce And Community Services
Overview
This Subrecipient Monitoring Site Visit Checklist is built for pass-through entities that need to document on-site oversight of a federal subaward. It guides the reviewer through the same sequence a monitor would use in the field: confirm the visit logistics, review the award and prior reports, test financial controls, sample source documentation, check procurement and contractor oversight, evaluate program performance, and close out with findings and corrective actions.
Use it when the award is subject to Uniform Guidance subrecipient monitoring expectations and you need a defensible record of what was reviewed and what evidence supported the conclusion. It is especially useful for higher-risk subrecipients, awards with prior findings, programs with cost-sharing or indirect costs, and visits where both finance and program compliance must be checked. The checklist also helps standardize follow-up after Single Audit issues or prior monitoring findings.
Do not use this as a substitute for a desk review when no site visit is planned, and do not use it as a generic audit form for vendors or contractors. It is also not the right tool for purely technical program evaluations that do not involve federal award oversight. If the subaward has highly specialized compliance terms, add those requirements to the checklist so the visit captures them explicitly.
Standards & compliance context
- The checklist supports subrecipient oversight expectations under Uniform Guidance by documenting review of financial systems, source records, performance, and corrective actions.
- The financial control and allowability sections align with federal cost principles and common audit expectations for separately identifiable award expenditures.
- Procurement and contractor oversight prompts help verify competition, debarment screening, and contract monitoring consistent with federal grant requirements and internal control standards.
- Program and special-conditions sections help document compliance with award-specific terms, civil rights assurances, and any prior approval requirements tied to the subaward.
- Corrective action tracking supports audit follow-up and closure evidence expected under federal grant management and Single Audit review processes.
General regulatory context for orientation only — verify current requirements with counsel or the relevant agency before relying on this template for compliance.
What's inside this template
Visit Logistics and Pre-Visit Documentation
This section confirms the visit is properly planned and that the reviewer has the award file, reports, and prior findings needed to make the site visit efficient and defensible.
-
Site visit notification letter issued to subrecipient at least 14 days in advance
Confirm that written notification was provided to the subrecipient organization no fewer than 14 calendar days before the scheduled visit date.
-
Subrecipient award agreement (subaward) on file and reviewed prior to visit
Confirm the executed subaward agreement, including all terms, conditions, and federal award identification information required by 2 CFR §200.332(a), was reviewed before the site visit.
-
Most recent subrecipient progress report and financial report reviewed
Confirm that the most recently submitted programmatic progress report and financial status report were reviewed as part of pre-visit desk review.
-
Subrecipient risk assessment rating (current cycle)
Record the subrecipient’s current risk rating as determined by the pass-through entity’s risk assessment process per 2 CFR §200.332(b).
-
Prior monitoring findings or audit findings pending resolution
Indicate whether any unresolved findings from prior monitoring visits, Single Audits, or OIG reviews exist for this subrecipient. If yes, document finding reference numbers in comments.
-
Site visit participants and roles documented
List all pass-through entity staff and subrecipient staff present during the visit, including names and titles.
Financial Management System and Internal Controls
This section tests whether the subrecipient can separately track federal funds, protect them with basic controls, and reconcile activity to the ledger.
-
Subrecipient maintains a financial management system that identifies federal award expenditures separately from other funds
Verify that federal award expenditures are tracked in a distinct cost center, fund code, or account that prevents commingling with non-federal funds per 2 CFR §200.302(b)(1).
-
Chart of accounts or general ledger reviewed and federal award transactions are identifiable
Inspect the general ledger or chart of accounts to confirm that individual transactions can be traced to the federal award and that account coding is consistent with the approved budget.
-
Cash management practices minimize time between drawdown and disbursement (interest earned on federal funds reported if applicable)
Confirm that federal cash drawdowns are timed to meet immediate disbursement needs per 2 CFR §200.305. If interest exceeds $500 per year, verify it is remitted to the federal agency.
-
Written policies and procedures for financial management and internal controls are documented and current
Review written fiscal policies covering authorization of expenditures, segregation of duties, bank reconciliation, and safeguarding of assets per 2 CFR §200.303.
-
Segregation of duties is evident for authorization, recording, and custody of federal funds
Confirm that no single employee has sole control over all phases of a financial transaction (e.g., the person who approves expenditures does not also reconcile the bank account).
-
Bank reconciliations performed monthly and reviewed by a supervisor
Verify that bank statements are reconciled to the general ledger monthly and that a second authorized individual reviews and approves the reconciliation.
-
Federal expenditures reported to date (current award period)
Enter the total federal expenditures reported by the subrecipient for the current award period as of the visit date.
Source Documentation and Cost Allowability
This section verifies that sampled costs are backed by records and meet federal allowability, allocability, and reasonableness expectations.
-
Personnel costs supported by time and effort records (timesheets, semi-annual certifications, or equivalent) per 2 CFR §200.430
Review a sample of payroll records and time distribution documentation. For employees working solely on the federal award, confirm certifications are on file. For split-funded employees, confirm timesheets reflect actual activity.
-
Non-personnel direct costs (supplies, travel, contractual) supported by invoices, receipts, or purchase orders
Select a sample of non-personnel expenditures from the general ledger and verify that each is supported by an original invoice, receipt, or purchase order that matches the recorded amount and is approved by an authorized signatory.
-
Costs charged to the award are allowable, allocable, and reasonable per 2 CFR Subpart E cost principles
Assess whether sampled expenditures conform to the cost principles applicable to the subrecipient’s entity type (nonprofit: 2 CFR §200.400–§200.475; governmental: same Subpart E; IHE: same). Flag any unallowable costs (e.g., entertainment, lobbying, unbudgeted items).
-
Indirect cost rate applied is consistent with negotiated rate agreement (NICRA) or de minimis rate election
Verify that the indirect cost rate used matches the current NICRA on file with the cognizant federal agency, or that the 10% de minimis rate is applied correctly per 2 CFR §200.414(f) if no NICRA exists.
-
Number of expenditure transactions sampled during this review
Record the total number of individual expenditure line items reviewed as part of the source documentation sample.
-
Number of transactions with documentation deficiencies identified
Record the count of sampled transactions that lacked adequate supporting documentation or contained unallowable costs. Document specifics in comments.
-
Match or cost-share requirements documented and verifiable (if applicable)
If the subaward includes a matching or cost-sharing requirement, verify that non-federal match is documented, meets the criteria of 2 CFR §200.306, and is tracked separately in the financial system.
Procurement and Contractor Oversight
This section checks whether purchasing decisions, vendor screening, and contractor monitoring were handled in a way that supports federal compliance.
-
Written procurement policy exists and includes competition thresholds, conflict of interest, and debarment/suspension checks
Review the subrecipient’s procurement policy for required elements: small purchase thresholds, sealed bid/competitive proposal procedures, sole-source justification criteria, and prohibition on doing business with debarred parties (SAM.gov check per 2 CFR §200.213).
-
Contracts or purchase orders reviewed reflect competitive procurement or documented sole-source justification
For a sample of contracts charged to the award, verify that procurement files contain evidence of competition (e.g., bid tabulations, RFP/RFQ documentation) or a written sole-source justification approved by an authorized official.
-
Subrecipient verified contractors/vendors are not on the SAM.gov Exclusions list prior to award
Confirm that SAM.gov exclusion checks were performed and documented for contractors receiving $25,000 or more per 2 CFR §200.213 and 2 CFR Part 180.
-
Contractor performance is monitored and documented (deliverables, invoices reviewed against scope of work)
Verify that the subrecipient has a process for reviewing contractor invoices against deliverables and that evidence of performance monitoring (e.g., progress reports, acceptance memos) is on file.
Programmatic Performance and Reporting
This section confirms that the subrecipient is delivering the approved program, reporting results on time, and getting approval before major changes.
-
Performance measures and targets defined in the subaward are documented and tracked
Confirm that the subrecipient has a system for tracking performance indicators, output measures, and outcome targets specified in the award agreement or approved work plan.
-
Progress reports submitted on schedule and contain required performance data
Review submission dates of the most recent progress reports against required reporting deadlines in the subaward. Verify that reports include quantitative performance data, narrative on activities, and explanation of any variances.
-
Current performance against targets — overall assessment
Based on review of progress reports and programmatic records, assess the subrecipient’s overall progress toward meeting award objectives.
-
Program files and participant/client records are maintained and accessible for review
Verify that programmatic records (e.g., participant eligibility files, service logs, case notes) are organized, complete, and available for inspection. Confirm records are retained per the schedule required by 2 CFR §200.334.
-
Subrecipient has reported any significant developments, scope changes, or budget modifications to the pass-through entity
Confirm that the subrecipient has notified the pass-through entity of any problems, delays, adverse conditions, or budget/scope changes requiring prior approval per 2 CFR §200.308 and subaward terms.
-
Budget modifications requiring prior approval were submitted and approved before implementation
If any budget reallocations exceeding 10% of the total award or changes in scope occurred, verify that prior written approval was obtained from the pass-through entity (and federal agency if required) before the change was made.
Federal Award Compliance and Special Conditions
This section captures award-wide requirements that often drive findings when registrations, assurances, or special conditions are overlooked.
-
Subrecipient has an active registration in SAM.gov (or equivalent system) if required by the prime award
Confirm SAM.gov registration status and expiration date if the subrecipient is required to maintain registration as a condition of the subaward.
-
Civil rights compliance assurances on file (Title VI, Section 504, ADA, as applicable)
Verify that the subrecipient has signed applicable civil rights assurances and has policies prohibiting discrimination in program delivery per Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the ADA.
-
Lobbying certification (SF-LLL or equivalent) on file if award exceeds $100,000
For awards exceeding $100,000, confirm that the subrecipient has submitted a completed lobbying disclosure certification per 31 U.S.C. §1352 and 2 CFR Part 418.
-
All special conditions attached to the subaward have been reviewed with subrecipient and are being met
Review any special conditions imposed on the subaward (e.g., restricted drawdown, required training, additional reporting) and confirm the subrecipient is in compliance with each condition.
Corrective Actions and Prior Findings Resolution
This section shows whether earlier findings were actually fixed and whether the subrecipient has evidence to support closure.
-
Open findings from prior monitoring visits are documented in a corrective action plan (CAP) with responsible parties and due dates
Confirm that each unresolved finding has a written corrective action plan identifying the root cause, corrective steps, responsible staff member, and target completion date.
-
Single Audit findings (if applicable) have been addressed and evidence of corrective action is on file
If the subrecipient had findings in their most recent Single Audit (required when federal expenditures exceed $750,000 per 2 CFR §200.501), verify that corrective actions have been implemented and documented.
-
Number of open corrective action items as of visit date
Record the total count of corrective action items that remain open (not yet fully resolved) as of the site visit date.
Site Visit Findings, Summary, and Sign-Off
This section turns the review into an actionable record by summarizing deficiencies, deadlines, evidence, and acknowledgments from both parties.
-
Overall monitoring determination
Select the overall compliance determination for this monitoring visit based on findings identified across all sections.
-
Summary of findings and deficiencies identified during this visit
Provide a narrative summary of all findings, deficiencies, and areas of non-conformance identified during the site visit. Reference the applicable regulatory citation for each finding (e.g., ‘2 CFR §200.430 — time and effort records incomplete for 3 of 5 sampled employees’).
-
Required corrective actions and deadlines communicated to subrecipient during exit conference
Confirm that findings and required corrective actions were verbally communicated to subrecipient management during the exit conference, and that a written monitoring report will be issued within 30 days.
-
Follow-up monitoring visit or desk review required?
Indicate whether a follow-up monitoring activity (on-site or desk review) is required to verify corrective action implementation. If yes, document the planned timeframe in comments.
-
Supporting documentation and evidence collected during visit (photos, copies of records)
Attach photographs or scanned copies of key documents reviewed during the visit (e.g., general ledger excerpts, time records, procurement files) to support monitoring findings.
-
Pass-through entity monitor signature
Authorized pass-through entity monitoring staff member signature certifying that this checklist accurately reflects the findings of the site visit.
-
Subrecipient authorized representative signature (acknowledgment of findings)
Subrecipient authorized organizational representative signature acknowledging receipt of verbal findings communicated during the exit conference. Signature does not constitute agreement with findings.
How to use this template
- 1. Enter the subaward details, current risk rating, prior findings, and planned visit participants before the site visit so the reviewer has a complete file.
- 2. Review the award agreement, recent progress and financial reports, and any open corrective actions before arriving so you can test the right records on site.
- 3. During the visit, walk through each section in order and verify the financial system, source documentation, procurement files, and program records against the award terms.
- 4. Record sampled transactions, deficiencies, and supporting evidence as you go, including notes on allowability, allocability, approvals, and missing documentation.
- 5. Hold an exit conference to communicate findings, required corrective actions, and deadlines, then document whether follow-up monitoring or a desk review is needed.
Best practices
- Sample transactions that reflect the award’s highest-risk cost categories, not just the easiest records to pull.
- Verify that payroll support matches the period of performance and the actual work charged to the federal award.
- Check that procurement files include competition, sole-source justification when used, and debarment or suspension screening before award.
- Tie every finding to a specific record, report, or policy gap so the corrective action is easy to track and close.
- Separate program performance review from financial review so a good narrative report does not mask unsupported costs.
- Document who provided each record during the visit, especially when the subrecipient uses shared services or multiple departments.
- Photograph or copy critical evidence during the visit rather than relying on memory after the site walk-through.
What this template typically catches
Issues teams running this template most often surface in practice:
Common use cases
Frequently asked questions
What does this subrecipient monitoring site visit checklist cover?
It covers the full on-site review a pass-through entity performs to verify that a subrecipient is managing a federal award properly. The checklist walks through visit logistics, financial management, source documentation, procurement, program performance, special conditions, and corrective actions. It is designed to produce a clear record of what was reviewed, what was found, and what needs follow-up. It is not a grant application or a general audit form.
When should a pass-through entity use this template?
Use it during scheduled monitoring visits, follow-up visits after prior findings, or risk-based reviews of higher-risk subrecipients. It is especially useful when the award has material spend, complex cost allocations, contractor activity, or prior compliance issues. You can also use it before closeout to confirm that open corrective actions are resolved. If you only need a desk review of reports, this template may be more detailed than necessary.
Who should complete the site visit checklist?
A grants manager, compliance officer, program monitor, or other authorized pass-through entity representative should complete it. The person using it should understand the subaward terms, the approved budget, and the applicable federal compliance requirements. In many organizations, one person leads the visit while finance or program staff support the review. The checklist also captures the subrecipient representative’s acknowledgment at the end.
How does this relate to Uniform Guidance and federal subaward oversight?
The template is aligned to the oversight expectations in Uniform Guidance for subrecipient monitoring, including review of financial systems, allowable costs, performance, and corrective action follow-up. It helps document that the pass-through entity is not relying only on reports, but is also verifying source records and internal controls on site. The checklist can support audit readiness by showing what was reviewed and what evidence was collected. It does not replace legal review of award terms or agency-specific requirements.
What are the most common mistakes this checklist helps catch?
Common issues include missing timesheets or effort certifications, unsupported travel or supply costs, weak segregation of duties, and procurement files without competition or debarment checks. It also surfaces late progress reports, unapproved budget changes, and special conditions that were not fully implemented. Another frequent gap is poor documentation of corrective action closure after a prior finding. The checklist makes these issues visible before they become audit findings.
Can this template be customized for different grant programs?
Yes. You can add program-specific performance measures, special conditions, cost categories, or approval thresholds without changing the overall monitoring structure. Many users tailor the checklist for education, health, housing, workforce, or research subawards. You can also adjust the sampling fields to match the size and risk of the award. The core sections should stay intact so the review remains consistent across visits.
How often should subrecipient site visits be performed?
Frequency should be driven by risk, award size, prior findings, and the complexity of the subrecipient’s operations. Higher-risk subrecipients may need annual or more frequent on-site monitoring, while lower-risk recipients may be reviewed less often with a desk review in between. The checklist includes a risk assessment reference so the cadence is documented. The right schedule is the one that matches your written monitoring plan and award conditions.
What documentation should be collected during the visit?
Collect copies or screenshots of the records that support the findings, such as ledgers, invoices, timesheets, procurement files, progress reports, and corrective action evidence. If the visit reveals physical issues or record gaps, add photos or annotated notes where appropriate. The goal is to preserve enough evidence to support the monitoring determination and any required follow-up. Keep the record consistent with your organization’s retention policy.
Related templates
Go deeper on the topic
-
Predictive scheduling laws — also called fair workweek laws or secure scheduling — require employers in covered industries to publish employee schedules...
-
Overtime calculation is the process of applying federal, state, local, and contractual rules to hours worked to determine the correct pay — including...
-
A near-miss is an event that could have caused injury or damage but didn't — a slip that didn't fall, a load that shifted but didn't drop, a machine that...
-
Lockout/tagout (LOTO) is the procedure for controlling hazardous energy — electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical, thermal, chemical — before...
-
Unregulated generative AI exposes companies to data leaks, compliance violations, and productivity blind spots. Learn how to govern AI adoption before...
-
Overcome enterprise-wide AI deployment challenges with scalable GenAI strategies that cut costs, boost adoption, and deliver measurable ROI.
-
AI employee self-service assistants cut HR and IT support time with instant answers, automated routing, and better employee experience.
-
Deploy collaboration tools successfully with 5 proven tips to boost adoption, align teams, and improve communication from day one.
Ready to use this template?
Get started with MangoApps and use Subrecipient Monitoring Site Visit Checklist with your team — pricing built for small business.