Support or reimburse HUD $159,938 from nonproject funds for the unsupported payments of housing assistance cited in the finding.
2019-CH-1003 | Septiembre 03, 2019
The Management Agent for Lake View Towers Apartments, Chicago, IL, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Section 8 HAP Program Requirements
Housing
2019-CH-1003-001-C
$159,938Questioned CostsRecommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
2019-CH-1003-001-D
$26,915Questioned CostsRecommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Pursue collection from the applicable household or reimburse HUD $26,915 from nonproject funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to unreported income.
2019-CH-1003-001-E
$54,257Funds Put to Better UseRecommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Implement adequate quality control procedures to ensure that housing assistance payments are appropriately calculated and supported. These procedures and controls should ensure that $54,257 in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.
2019-CH-1003-001-F
Ensure that third-party verifications, such as tax returns provided by the applicant, are from the source by obtaining certified tax returns from the Internal Revenue Service.
2019-CH-1003-001-H
Ensure that the management agent’s staff is properly trained and familiar with HUD’s and the project’s requirements regarding housing assistance payments calculations.
2019-CH-1003-001-I
$239,500Questioned CostsRecommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Conduct criminal record background checks in accordance with the project’s policies and procedures to ensure that adult members of all households, including the 11 households for which HUD made housing assistance payments totaling $239,500, were eligible to participate in the program. If the participants are deemed ineligible, the owner should follow applicable regulations to terminate or modify assistance and reimburse HUD from nonproject funds for those housing assistance payments deemed ineligible.
2019-AT-1005 | Agosto 09, 2019
The Municipality of Yauco, PR, Did Not Always Administer Its CDBG Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
2019-AT-1005-001-A
Develop and implement a financial management system in accordance with HUD requirements, including but not limited to permitting the disbursement of funds in a timely manner.
2019-AT-1005-001-B
$1,045,085Questioned CostsRecommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Ensure that $1,045,085 in CDBG funds drawn from HUD between July 1, 2015, and October 31, 2018, can be traced to a level, which ensures that such funds have not been used in violation of the restrictions and prohibitions of applicable statutes, or reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds. Footnote 2: Total drawdowns of more than $1.5 million were adjusted to consider $106 questioned in recommendation 1D and $469,974 in recommendation 2A.
2019-AT-1005-001-C
$1,641Funds Put to Better UseRecommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Require the Municipality to return to its line of credit and put to better use $1,641 associated with the unspent program funds that have been carried over since December 2017.
2019-AT-1005-001-E
Establish and implement adequate controls and procedures to permit proper accountability for all CDBG funds to ensure that they are used solely for authorized purposes and properly safeguarded.
2019-AT-1005-002-A
$469,974Questioned CostsRecommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Submit supporting documentation showing how $469,974 in CDBG funds disbursed for street improvements was properly used and in accordance with HUD requirements or reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds.
2019-AT-1005-002-B
Determine the amount spent for the resurfacing of the 16 private properties identified and reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds.
2019-AT-1005-002-C
Establish and implement adequate policies and procedures, including project inspection protocols, to ensure that CDBG funds are used for activities that meet a national objective, are used for eligible purposes, and are properly supported.
2019-KC-0002 | Junio 25, 2019
HUD Paid Rental Subsidies To Benefit Public Housing and Voucher Tenants Reported as Excluded From Federal Programs or Deceased
Public and Indian Housing
2019-KC-0002-001-A
$13,669,007Funds Put to Better UseRecommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Issue guidance to PHAs to ensure any applicant for or tenant of public or assisted housing whose name appears on the SAM excluded parties list are reviewed by PHAs to determine eligibility in a manner consistent with the regulations in 2 CFR 180 and 2424 so that ineligible applicants or tenants are not admitted or recertified to put up to $13.7 million to better use.
2019-AT-1004 | Junio 14, 2019
The North Carolina Department of Commerce Did Not Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Grants as Required by HUD
Community Planning and Development
2019-AT-1004-001-A
$417,113Funds Put to Better UseRecommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Put $417,113 in unspent NSP1 funds associated with three activities to better use by reprogramming the funds to other subrecipients using an appropriate method or return the funds to HUD.
2019-AT-1004-001-B
$1,300,000Questioned CostsRecommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Support or reimburse its NSP1 grant $1,300,000 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported reallocation of grant funds.
2019-AT-1004-001-D
$1,186,105Questioned CostsRecommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Support or reimburse the appropriate NSP grant $1,186,105 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported subrecipient and administrative expenditures.
2019-AT-1004-001-F
Update the NSP program income information in HUD’s grant tracking system and quarterly performance reports and reconcile with the Department’s records.
2019-AT-1004-001-G
Establish and implement written procedures and provide adequate training to staff associated with administering the NSP grant to help ensure accurate reporting of program income.
2019-BO-1001 | Abril 25, 2019
The City of Bridgeport, CT, Did Not Properly Administer Its HOME Program
Community Planning and Development
2019-BO-1001-001-B
$3,136,798Questioned CostsRecommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Support that $3,136,798 in HOME funds disbursed was reasonable and supported in accordance with Federal requirements or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported.