Implement adequate quality control procedures to ensure that it correctly calculates housing assistance payments to ensure that $32,960 in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.

Reimburse its program $25,231($15,061 in inappropriate graduation payments $10,170 in inappropriate interim disbursements) from non-Federal funds for the incorrect escrow account disbursements.

Support or reimburse its program $296 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported escrow account disbursements.

Reimburse the appropriate households $375 from program funds for the underpaid escrow disbursements.

Support its general ledger and bank account balances or transfer $2,547 ($2,334 for the overfunded general ledger account $213 for the overfunded program bank account) from its Family Self-Sufficiency program account to its Housing Choice Voucher program account for the overfunded accounts cited in the finding.

Deposit the Family Self-Sufficiency program escrow funds into an interest-bearing account in accordance with HUD’s requirements.

Ensure that the program coordinator is trained on and familiar with HUD’s regulations.

Implement quality control procedures to ensure that (1) documentation required by HUD is correctly completed and maintained, (2) escrow account disbursements are appropriate and fully supported, (3) escrow account deposits are correctly calculated and recorded, and (4) the contracts of participation contain information that reflects participants’ current income and family rent amounts. The controls should include procedures for the review and approval of contract extensions and escrow account disbursements.

Evaluate its administration of the program to ensure it has the necessary capacity and resources to effectively manage the program.

Complete the rulemaking process for HUD’s single-family note sales program.

Develop and implement formal procedures and guidance for the note sales program.

We recommend that the General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development develop and implement a quality review process at the headquarters level to ensure consistent compliance with its policy for risk analysis, to include but not be limited to reviewing supporting documentation for conclusions drawn.

We recommend that the General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, develop and implement a policy requiring field offices to rate grantees of at least medium risk that have not been monitored in their respective program area within the last 3 years on factors that require assessments of capacity, program complexity, and monitoring findings resulting in repayment or grant reductions.

We recommend that the General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, develop and implement guidance for field offices to maintain supporting documentation in their official files with an adequate explanation of procedures performed to verify risk scores assigned, which could include upgrading CPD’s systems to allow for the attachment of supporting documentation for risk analyses.

We recommend that the General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, develop and implement a quality control review process at the headquarters level to ensure compliance with monitoring requirements for reports and exhibits, to include but not be limited to explaining procedures performed and adequately explaining and providing supporting documentation for conclusions drawn.

We recommend that the General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, require field offices to upload referenced supporting documentation into CPD’s system for findings and concerns developed during the monitoring review.

We recommend that the General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, update exhibits to require staff to document procedures performed, provide sufficient explanation to verify procedures performed and conclusions drawn, and reference appropriate supporting documentation.

Reconcile the $58,457 difference among its system report and subsidiary ledger and the information reported in HUD’s system ($1,944 in monthly escrow deposits $521 difference in monthly escrow deposits between HUD’s system and the amount reported in the Voucher Management system the average difference of $55,992 in total escrow account balances) to ensure that the monthly escrow deposits and total escrow balances are appropriately reported in HUD’s system and provide the supporting documentation to HUD.

Reconcile the current program participants and related information in its internal systems with the current participants listed in HUD’s systems.

Transfer $4,684 from its Housing Choice Voucher program account to its program account for the 12 participants with underfunded escrows.