U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know

The .gov means it’s official.

Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure.

The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Document

We audited the State of Oklahoma because it received $93.7 million in Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) allocations for presidentially declared disasters that occurred in 2011, 2012, and 2013.  The substantial amount of CDBG-DR funding required a review of the State’s program.  Our objective was to determine whether the State obligated and spent its grant in accordance with requirements. 

The State did not obligate and spend CDBG-DR funds in accordance with requirements.  The State failed to support how it determined activity eligibility, existence, disaster event qualification, reasonableness of cost estimates, prioritization, and fund allocation as required.  It routinely did not determine compliance with procurement and environmental requirements.  Further, it routinely made payments based on incomplete, insufficient, or no supporting documentation.   The State believed that its procedures for obligating and spending Federal funds were its choice based upon its understanding of CDBG requirements.  The State’s failure to comply with requirements resulted in unsupported obligations and expenditures of more than $11.7 million and $4.3 million, respectively.

We recommended that the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to (1) develop and implement policies and procedures to document and perform detailed review and testing to establish eligibility, existence, disaster event qualifications, reasonableness of cost estimates, prioritization, and fund allocation, both retroactively and prospectively, which would put $81.9 million to better use; (2) support or properly obligate more than $11.7 million in unsupported obligations; and (3) support or repay more than $4.3 million in unsupported expenditures.

Recommendations

Community Planning and Development

  •  
    Status
      Open
      Closed
    2016-FW-1010-001-A
    $81,982,712.00
    Funds 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.

    We recommend that the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to develop and implement policies and procedures to document and perform detailed review and testing to establish eligibility, existence, disaster event qualifications, reasonableness of cost estimates, prioritization, and fund allocation, both retroactively and prospectively, which would put $81,982,712 to better use.

  •  
    Status
      Open
      Closed
    2016-FW-1010-001-B
    $11,717,288.00
    Questioned 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 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to support or properly obligate $11,717,288 in unsupported obligations.