We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs instruct the Philadelphia, PA, field office to require Luzerne County to reclassify program income already reported to the activity ID in IDIS that generated the income, ensuring that the $798,273 in program income is properly accounted for.
2017-NY-0002 | Septiembre 29, 2017
HUD Could Improve Its Controls Over the Disposition of Real Properties Assisted With Community Development Block Grant Funds
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-NY-0002-001-FOpenClosed
- Status2017-NY-0002-001-IOpenClosed
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs issue guidance to HUD staff and grantees to clarify the applicability of change of use requirements in cases where there is both a repayment from non-Federal funds and a voluntary grant reduction.
2017-PH-1006 | Septiembre 25, 2017
The Owner of Schwenckfeld Manor, Lansdale, PA, Did Not Always Manage Its HUD-Insured Property in Accordance With Applicable HUD Requirements
General Counsel
- Status2017-PH-1006-001-AOpenClosed$2,019,496Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to show that payroll costs totaling $2,019,496 and any payroll costs incurred outside our audit period, including fiscal year 2017, were reasonable and necessary expenses for the operation of the project or repay the project from nonproject funds for any amount that it cannot support.
- Status2017-PH-1006-001-BOpenClosed$56,021Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to show that other direct costs totaling $56,021 and any direct costs incurred outside our audit period, including fiscal year 2017, were reasonable and necessary expenses for the operation of the project or repay the project from nonproject funds for any amount that it cannot support.
2017-LA-0004 | Septiembre 14, 2017
HUD Did Not Have Adequate Controls To Ensure That Servicers Properly Engaged in Loss Mitigation
Housing
- Status2017-LA-0004-001-DOpenClosed$1,673,117Questioned 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.
Require indemnification for the 26 loans that had significant servicing deficiencies. In these cases, the loss to HUD was $1,673,117 (appendixes A and D).
- Status2017-LA-0004-001-FOpenClosed
Require that the servicers with significant and other deficiencies revise and update their policies and procedures, as necessary, to ensure that they comply with HUD requirements and guidance on loss mitigation evaluation.
2017-PH-0001 | Septiembre 05, 2017
HUD Can Improve Its Oversight of Community Development Block Grant Direct Home-Ownership Assistance Activities
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-PH-0001-001-AOpenClosed$227,260Questioned 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.
Direct responsible field offices to require the grantees identified by the audit to either provide documentation to support $227,260 in unsupported payments or reimburse their programs from non-Federal funds for costs they cannot support.
- Status2017-PH-0001-001-BOpenClosed
Provide guidance to field office staff to clarify the statutory requirements in 42 U.S.C. 5305(a)(24) regarding a principal reduction and a downpayment for direct home-ownership assistance activities.
2017-FW-0001 | Julio 10, 2017
HUD’s Monitoring of State CDBG
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-FW-0001-001-DOpenClosed
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.
2017-LA-1005 | Junio 16, 2017
The City of Huntington Park, CA, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program in Accordance With Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-LA-1005-001-BOpenClosed$576,997Questioned 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 the $576,997 in code enforcement costs (activities 499, 512, and 531), including meeting code enforcement and cost allocation requirements, or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-LA-1005-001-COpenClosed$328,918Funds 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 revised code enforcement program policies and procedures to meet CDBG requirements. This will help ensure that the remaining $328,918 budgeted for code enforcement activity 531 is put to better use.
- Status2017-LA-1005-001-DOpenClosed$110,000Questioned 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 the reasonableness of the $110,000 Graffiti Removal program (activities 504 and 520) cost allocations or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-LA-1005-001-EOpenClosed$31,186Questioned 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 the $31,186 After School program (activity 501) costs, including the reasonableness of the contract costs and meeting the limited clientele national objective, or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-LA-1005-001-FOpenClosed$95,736Questioned 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 the reasonableness of the $95,736 in cost allocations charged as CDBG administrative (activity 522) costs or repay the costs from non-Federal funds.
2017-PH-1003 | Mayo 22, 2017
The Yorkville Cooperative, Fairfax, VA, Did Not Administer Its HUD-Insured Property and Housing Assistance Contract According to Applicable Requirements
Housing
- Status2017-PH-1003-001-AOpenClosed$970,381Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to show that prices paid for purchases of products and services totaling $970,381 were fair and reasonable or reimburse the project from nonproject funds for any amounts that were not fair and reasonable.
2017-PH-1001 | Marzo 22, 2017
The City of Pittsburgh, PA, Did Not Always Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program in Accordance With HUD and Federal Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-PH-1001-001-BOpenClosed$942,636Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to show that costs totaling $942,636 for activity 7099 were for employees’ actual time spent benefiting the activity or repay its program from non-Federal funds for any amount that it cannot support.
- Status2017-PH-1001-001-COpenClosed$100,000Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to show that costs totaling $100,000 for activity 6865 benefited the activity or repay its program from non-Federal funds for any amount that it cannot support.
2017-NY-1008 | Marzo 09, 2017
The Irvington, NJ, Housing Authority Did Not Always Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With Program Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-AOpenClosed$88,534Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide supporting documentation to justify the $88,534 in unsupported travel and training costs related to out-of-State trainings, meetings, and conferences. Any amount determined to be ineligible should be repaid from non-Federal funds to the Operating Fund.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-BOpenClosed$27,599Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide supporting documentation to justify the $27,599 in unsupported training travel and per diem expenses related to quarterly meetings and trainings offered by HAI. Any amount determined to be ineligible should be repaid from non-Federal funds to the Operating Fund.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-COpenClosed$27,487Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide supporting documentation to justify the $27,487 reimbursed to Authority officials for various costs, such as health coverage waiver incentives, supplies, food, and decorations. Any amount determined to be ineligible should be repaid from non-Federal funds to the Operating Fund.