Certify, along with the owners of the 26 units cited in the finding, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected.
2018-AT-1006 | Julio 13, 2018
The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority, Lexington, KY, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2018-AT-1006-003-BOpenClosedClosed on Noviembre 08, 2019
- Status2018-AT-1006-003-COpenClosedClosed on Noviembre 08, 2019
Perform all required quality control housing quality standards inspections in compliance with its HUD-approved MTW plan, thus helping to ensure that its inspectors perform housing quality standards inspections in accordance with HUD’s requirements.
2018-AT-1008 | Julio 13, 2018
The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority, Lexington, KY, Did Not Fully Comply With HUD’s Program Requirements After the Completion of Its Rental Assistance Demonstration Program Conversion
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2018-AT-1008-001-AOpenClosedClosed on Abril 27, 2020$443,204Questioned 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 its Section 8 Project-Based Voucher program $443,204 ($394,190 in housing assistance payments and $49,014 in associated administrative fees) from nonproject funds for the payments related to the 206 Authority-owned units’ inspections not conducted by a HUD-approved independent entity and for compliance with housing quality standards for the period January 1, 2016, through August 5, 2016.
- Status2018-AT-1008-001-BOpenClosedClosed on Septiembre 09, 2020
Ensure that HUD-approved independent third parties complete the unit inspections and determine the rent reasonableness for units it owns or seek an appropriate exemption of program requirements from the HUD Secretary.
- Status2018-AT-1008-001-COpenClosedClosed on Agosto 06, 2019
Ensure that in future RAD conversions, if any, unit inspections are conducted for compliance with HUD’s housing quality standards after rehabilitation and construction is completed and before tenants move in.
- Status2018-AT-1008-001-DOpenClosedClosed on Septiembre 16, 2019
Provide adequate training to its staff to ensure compliance with Section 8 Project-Based Voucher program requirements for unit inspections and rent reasonableness determinations.
2018-LA-1005 | Julio 03, 2018
The City of Modesto, CA, Did Not Use Community Development Block Grant Funds in Accordance with HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-AOpenClosedClosed on Marzo 27, 2019$592,266Questioned 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.
Support that the $592,266 spent on the HACS rental rehabilitation projects was reasonable or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-BOpenClosedClosed on Marzo 27, 2019$401,614Questioned 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.
Support that the $401,614 spent on STANCO rental rehabilitation projects was reasonable and met one of HUD’s national objectives and that it completed an environmental review or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-COpenClosedClosed on Abril 18, 2019
Develop and implement policies to safeguard HUD funds by ensuring that its projects meet national objectives, have a completed environmental review, and have executed agreements for all projects and verify that work is complete before approving payment, including its rental rehabilitation projects.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-DOpenClosedClosed on Abril 18, 2019
Update policies and procedures to ensure that costs are reasonable, including preparing an independent cost estimate and a detailed scope of work for each project.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-EOpenClosedClosed on Abril 25, 2019$173,508Questioned 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.
Support that $173,508 spent on homeowner rehabilitation project expenses was reasonable or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-FOpenClosedClosed on Octubre 19, 2018
Update and implement policies and procedures to ensure that all procurements are conducted in a manner that promotes full and open competition and avoids any arbitrary action in the procurement process, including ensuring that contractors are given sufficient time to respond to solicitations.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-GOpenClosedClosed on Marzo 27, 2019$257,737Questioned 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.
Repay from non-Federal funds $257,737 from voucher 6035061 for the duplicate draw.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-HOpenClosedClosed on Septiembre 13, 2019$49,666Questioned 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.
Support that $45,304 drawn in advance met eligibility and procurement requirements and costs were reasonable or repay the unsupported amount from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-IOpenClosedClosed on Octubre 19, 2018
Update its policies and procedures to ensure that the City issues payments to vendors and obtains reimbursement from HUD only after the City’s Community and Economic Development Department has verified that work is complete.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-JOpenClosedClosed on Septiembre 04, 2019$323,563Questioned 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.
Support that $323,563 spent on rehabilitation administration charged in program year 2015 costs was reasonable and benefited the City’s rehabilitation program or repay the program from non-Federal funds any amount determined to be unreasonable or ineligible.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-KOpenClosedClosed on Septiembre 04, 2019$69,794Questioned 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.
Reclassify $69,794 in employee payroll and benefits for City employees that did not work on rehabilitation-related activities or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-LOpenClosedClosed on Agosto 28, 2019$67,036Questioned 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.
Support that expenses were related to rehabilitation activities for $66,910 in payroll expenses charged to the rehabilitation delivery expenses activity for its former environmental review specialist or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-MOpenClosedClosed on Agosto 28, 2019$16,272Questioned 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.
Support that expenses were related to rehabilitation activities for $13,263 in unsupported payroll or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1005-001-NOpenClosedClosed on Abril 01, 2019$517Questioned 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.
Reclassify $517 in miscellaneous expenses that was incorrectly prorated or repay the program from non-Federal funds.