Support or reimburse its program $2,533 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported payments of housing assistance cited in this finding.
2017-CH-1007 | Septiembre 28, 2017
The Menard County Housing Authority, Petersburg, IL, Did Not Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-COpenClosed$2,533Questioned Costs
Recommendations 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.
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-DOpenClosed$470Questioned Costs
Recommendations 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 households or reimburse its program $470 from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to unreported or underreported income.
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-EOpenClosed$3,178Questioned Costs
Recommendations 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.
Reimburse the appropriate households $3,178 from non-Federal funds for the rent amount paid in excess of 40 percent of the adjusted monthly income for the units that were not affordable.
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-FOpenClosed
For the five household’s residing in units that were not affordable, renegotiate the rent to the owners or require the households to move into units that are affordable.
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-GOpenClosed$108,214Funds Put to Better Use
Recommendations 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 procedures and controls to ensure that (1) housing assistance payments are appropriately calculated and supported, (2) households reside in units that are affordable, and (3) repayment agreements are created to recover overpaid housing assistance when unreported income is discovered during the examination process to ensure that $108,214 ($103,841 in potential overpayments $4,373 in potential underpayments of housing assistance) in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-HOpenClosed
Evaluate its quality control process to ensure that calculation, voucher size, payment standard, and utility allowance errors are identified and appropriately corrected.
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-IOpenClosed
Ensure that its staff is properly trained and familiar with HUD’s and its own requirements regarding program housing assistance calculations, applying appropriate voucher sizes, and when to apply changes to households’ payment standards and utility allowances.
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-JOpenClosed
Review all of the remaining program household files to determine whether appropriate voucher sizes were provided and payment standards and utility allowances were applied and updated appropriately. The Authority should conduct special recertifications for the households with vouchers that do not comply with HUD’s requirements and the Authority’s administrative plan, issue the appropriate voucher sizes, and apply updated payment standards and utility allowances as appropriate.
- Status2017-CH-1007-002-KOpenClosed
Restrict the Authority from administering other HUD-funded programs until it substantially improves its program administration to ensure compliance with applicable requirements based on the findings cited in this audit report, absent sufficient documentation provided by the Authority.
2017-NY-1013 | Septiembre 28, 2017
The New Brunswick Housing Authority, NJ, Did Not Always Administer Its Operating and Capital Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-AOpenClosed$800,439Questioned Costs
Recommendations 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 Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to provide documentation to show that the $800,439 paid for supplies and services purchased under the intergovernmental agreement for capital improvement projects was reasonable or reimburse its Capital Fund from non-Federal funds for any amount that it cannot support or that is not considered reasonable.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-BOpenClosed$217,403Questioned Costs
Recommendations 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 Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to provide documentation to show that the $217,403 paid for legal, fee accounting, management consulting, and auditing services was reasonable or reimburse its Capital Fund or Operating Fund from non-Federal funds for any amount that it cannot support or that is not considered reasonable.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-COpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to provide training to its staff related to HUD and Federal procurement requirements, including the requirements for using intergovernmental agreements and preparing independent cost estimates and cost analyses.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-DOpenClosed$187,492Questioned Costs
Recommendations 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 Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to provide documentation to show that $187,492 in 2013 and 2014 capital fund obligations or reimburse HUD from non-Federal funds for any amount that it cannot support.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-EOpenClosed$139,423Questioned Costs
Recommendations 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 Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to reimburse HUD $139,423 in replacement housing factor funds not disbursed by the expenditure deadline from its replacement housing factor funds or reduce its future capital funds.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-FOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to improve its policies and procedures to ensure that capital funds, including replacement housing factor funds, are obligated and spent for eligible activities in a timely manner.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-GOpenClosed$87,116Questioned Costs
Recommendations 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 Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to reimburse its project from non-Federal funds for $87,116 in excessive management fees charged for units undergoing demolition.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-HOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to submit a request to the HUD field office to revise its budget so that it reflects actual expenditures for 2014 capital funds.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-IOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to improve its policies and procedures to ensure that its budget, financial reports, and accounting data are accurate and up to date.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-JOpenClosed
We also recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing consider reducing future capital funds as a penalty for the Authority’s obligating its 2009, 2010, and 2011 replacement housing factor funds after the deadline.
2017-PH-1007 | Septiembre 28, 2017
The Chester Housing Authority, Chester, PA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-PH-1007-001-AOpenClosed
Certify, along with the owners of the 61 units cited in the finding, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected.