Support $422,600 in program income that was not used before additional grant fund drawdowns or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported
Publication Report
2018-BO-1005 | September 19, 2018
The State of Connecticut Did Not Ensure That Its Grantees Properly Administered Their Housing Rehabilitation Programs
We audited the State of Connecticut’s Small Cities Community Development Block Grant program based on an Office of Inspector General risk assessment, which ranked the State as the highest risk grantee in Connecticut. Our audit objective was to… moreRelated Recommendations
Community Planning and Development
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-AOpenClosedClosed on June 22, 2021$1,190,977.00Questioned 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 the $1,190,977 in ineligible costs charged to the program.
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-BOpenClosedClosed on June 22, 2021$434,970.00Questioned 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 the $434,970 in unreasonable costs charged to the program
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-COpenClosedClosed on June 22, 2021$249,015.00Questioned 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 $249,015 in program costs spent on a 2014 grant for which the grantee was unable to provide a tier one environmental review record or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-DOpenClosedClosed on June 22, 2021$676,922.00Questioned 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 $676,922 for contracts that were improperly procured or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported.
Strengthen controls over program oversight to ensure that grantees comply with their agreements and program requirements, including tier two environmental reviews, contract procurements, and homeowner and project eligibility, to ensure that (1) all income, including rental income, is considered; (2) loan-to-value ratios do not exceed 90 percent without State approval; and (3) projects do not exceed the program limits without State approval.
Strengthen controls over monitoring to ensure that onsite monitoring and monitoring letters are completed in a timely manner and sufficient supporting documentation is required and reviewed by those responsible for grant oversight.
Develop and implement policies and procedures to assess the validity of all program complaints to ensure that they are addressed and resolved in a timely manner.
Provide additional guidance to its grantees regarding its policy stating that the repair or replacement of paved surfaces should be minimal in cost and incidental to the rehabilitation of the dwelling, including whether grantees are required to consult with the State before starting the work.