Submit a plan for how it will proceed with respect to the Municipality of San Lorenzo activity center project, including a schedule that HUD can track to ensure its completion. HUD must reevaluate the feasibility of the activity and determine the eligibility of the $7,010,276 already invested. (Footnote 6: Total investments of $7,999,275 were adjusted to account for $988,154 questioned in recommendation 2A and $845 in recommendation 2C.) If HUD determines that the activity has been canceled or is not feasible, Municipal Affairs must mitigate activity losses by committing any unused loan proceeds for future loan repayments.
2015-AT-1001 | Diciembre 04, 2014
The Office of the Commissioner for Municipal Affairs Needs To Make Improvements in Administering Its Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program
Community Planning and Development
2015-AT-1001-001-A
$7,010,276Questioned 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.
2015-AT-1001-001-B
$7,369,000Questioned 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.
Submit a plan for how it will proceed with respect to the Municipality of Dorado hotel project, including a schedule that HUD can track to ensure its completion. HUD must reevaluate the feasibility of the activity and determine the eligibility of the $7,369,000 already invested. If HUD determines that the activity has been canceled or is not feasible, Municipal Affairs must mitigate activity losses by committing any unused loan proceeds for future loan repayments.
2015-AT-1001-001-C
$5,474,376Questioned 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 a plan for how it will proceed with respect to the Municipality of Camuy hotel project, including a schedule that HUD can track to ensure its completion. HUD must reevaluate the feasibility of the activity and determine the eligibility of the $5,474,376 already invested. (Footnote 7: Total investments of $5,830,878 were adjusted to account for $436 questioned in recommendation 2A and $356,066 in recommendation 2C.) If HUD determines that the activity has been canceled or is not feasible, Municipal Affairs must mitigate activity losses by committing any unused loan proceeds for future loan repayments.
2015-AT-1001-001-D
Conduct monitoring of the Section 108 activities with signs of slow progress to ensure that program objectives are met and provide the intended benefits.
2015-AT-1001-002-A
$1,080,242Questioned 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.
Recover from the borrowers and reimburse $1,080,242 to the applicable loan guarantee account from non-Federal funds for ineligible disbursements that were not related to the approved projects and used to finance local government operations.
2015-AT-1001-002-C
$367,840Questioned 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.
Obtain and submit supporting documentation showing the eligibility and propriety of $367,840 in disbursements or reimburse the loan guarantee account from non-Federal funds.
2015-AT-1001-002-D
Ensure that the borrowers either transfer the unexpended Section 108 loan proceeds to the repayment account or submit a request for extension to HUD.
2015-AT-1001-002-E
Ensure that the borrowers provide HUD the additional security requirements according to the loan agreement.
2015-AT-1001-002-F
Ensure that borrowers develop and implement a financial management system in accordance with HUD requirements to ensure that program funds can be traced to a level that ensures that such funds have not been used in violation of the restrictions and prohibitions of applicable statutes.
2015-AT-1001-002-G
Ensure that all Section 108 loan proceeds deposited at commercial banks are properly collateralized with Government obligations.
2015-AT-1001-002-H
Conduct monitoring reviews of all Section 108 projects and ensure that borrowers comply with all loan agreement provisions and HUD regulations.
2015-NY-1002 | Noviembre 30, 2014
The Freeport Housing Authority, Freeport, NY, Did Not Administer Its Low-Rent Housing and Homeownership Programs in Accordance With HUD’s Regulations
Public and Indian Housing
2015-NY-1002-002-C
$1,250,417Questioned 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.
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New York Office of Public and Indian Housing require Authority officials to provide supporting documents for the proper use of $1,250,417 in sale proceeds from the scattered-site properties. Any amounts not supported or found to be improperly used should be repaid to the homeownership program from non-Federal funds.
2015-NY-1001 | Noviembre 23, 2014
The City of New York, NY, Did Not Always Disburse Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Assistance Funds to Its Subrecipient in Accordance With Federal Regulations
Community Planning and Development
2015-NY-1001-001-A
$183,000,000Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs instruct City officials to provide documentation to justify the $183 million in unsupported salary and fringe benefits and associated expenses charged to the CDBG-DR program. If documentation provided does not support the costs, this amount should be repaid from non-Federal funds.
2015-FW-1801 | Octubre 02, 2014
The Management of the Housing Authority of the City of Taylor, Taylor, TX, Did Not Exercise Adequate Oversight of Its Programs
Public and Indian Housing
2015-FW-1801-001-C
$2,032,266Funds 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 Authority to take action to reclaim its properties valued at $2,032,266 to improve its financial position, decrease its reliance on HUD program funding, and address its comingling issues.
2015-FW-1801-001-D
$243,442Questioned 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.
Require the Authority to determine how much of the $243,442 in salaries for individuals assigned to work at multiple properties was improperly paid with Federal funds and repay the amounts to the appropriate programs from non-Federal funds. If the Authority is unable to accurately determine the amount due to and due from each program or support that the funds charged to the Federal programs were appropriate, the full $243,422 should be repaid to HUD.
2015-FW-1801-001-F
$40,600Questioned 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.
Require the Authority to determine whether the Authority improperly used Federal funds totaling $40,600 to make lease payments on the parking lot it already owned. If Federal funds were improperly used, the Authority should repay $40,600 from non-Federal funds to its Federal program accounts. If the Authority is unable to accurately determine the amount due to and due from each program or support that the funds charged to the Federal program were appropriate, the full $40,600 should be repaid to HUD.
2015-FW-1801-001-H
$11,833Questioned 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.
Require the Authority to determine whether the Authority improperly used Federal funds totaling $11,833 which were used to cancel an existing phone system and purchase a new one. If Federal funds were improperly used, the Authority should repay $11,833 to its Federal program accounts from non-Federal funds. If the Authority is unable to accurately determine the amount due to and due from each program or support that the funds charged to the Federal program were appropriate, the full $11,833 should be repaid to HUD.
2015-FW-1801-001-J
$50,000Questioned 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.
Require the Authority to determine whether the Authority improperly used Federal funds totaling $50,000 which were used to pay unnecessary severance contract costs. If Federal funds were improperly used, the Authority should repay $50,000 to its Federal program accounts from non-Federal funds. If the Authority is unable to accurately determine the amount due to and due from each program or support that the funds charged to the Federal program were appropriate, the full $50,000 should be repaid to HUD.
2014-PH-0001 | Septiembre 30, 2014
HUD Policies Did Not Always Ensure That HECM Borrowers Complied With Residency Requirement
Housing
2014-PH-0001-001-B
Implement controls to prevent or mitigate instances of borrowers violating HECM program residency requirements by concurrently participating in the Voucher program, including policies and procedures to at least annually coordinate with HUD’s Office of Public Housing to match borrower data in the Single Family Data Warehouse to member data in the Public Housing Information Center.
2014-NY-1008 | Julio 25, 2014
Palladia, Inc., New York, NY, Did Not Administer Its Supportive Housing Program in Accordance with HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
2014-NY-1008-001-A
$1,615,057Questioned 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.
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New York Office of Community Planning and Development instruct Palladia officials to provide documentation to justify that the $1,615,057 in unsupported costs is associated with eligible program activities. Any unsupported costs determined to be ineligible should be reimbursed from non-Federal funds.