Support the $126,824 in total incentive payments. For any amount it cannot support, HUD should require the project development group, LP, to pay the equivalent, from any of its reserves other than reserve for replacement, toward the project mortgage principle.
2019-KC-1001 | April 11, 2019
The Columbia Housing Authority, Columbia, MO, Did Not Maintain Written Records of Resident Relocation Incentive Payment Consultations or Properly Pay Business Relocation Incentives
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-KC-1001-001-AOpenClosed$126,824Questioned 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.
- Status2019-KC-1001-001-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement controls over its incentives program, including record-keeping requirements; defined processes, such as a detailed checklist of available incentives, including monetary limits; and supervisory review requirements.
- Status2019-KC-1001-002-AOpenClosed$9,608Questioned 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 the Authority to support the $9,608 payment with the required 2 years of average annual net earnings. For any amount that cannot be supported, HUD should require the Oak Towers Housing Development Group, LP, to pay the equivalent, from any of its reserves other than reserve for replacement, toward the Oak Towers mortgage principle.
- Status2019-KC-1001-002-BOpenClosed
Take appropriate administrative actions against Authority staff for noncompliance.
2019-CH-1002 | February 06, 2019
The Detroit Housing Commission, Detroit, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Moderate Rehabilitation Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-AOpenClosed$7,099Questioned 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 projects or reimburse its program $7,099 ($240 $20 $6,839) from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to incorrect calculations, inappropriate contract rents, and failure to correct housing quality standards deficiencies.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-BOpenClosed$24,457Funds 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.
Reimburse the appropriate projects $24,457 ($552 $958 $849 $22,098) from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance due to incorrect calculations, underpaid housing assistance, and inappropriate contract rents and recovery of program funds.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-COpenClosed$246Funds 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.
Reimburse the appropriate households $246 from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of tenant rent due to inappropriate calculations.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-DOpenClosed$23,350Questioned 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 program $23,350 ($2,089 $3,951 $208 $17,102) from non-Federal funds for the underpayment of tenant rent due to incorrect calculations, overpaid housing assistance and utility reimbursements, and its failure to perform housing quality standards inspections.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-EOpenClosed$648Questioned 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 or reimburse the appropriate projects $648 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported payments of housing assistance cited in this finding.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-FOpenClosed$6,137Questioned 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 or reimburse the appropriate households $6,137 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported payments of tenant rent cited in this finding.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-GOpenClosed$78,704Questioned 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 or reimburse its program $78,704 ($1,956 $76,748) from non-Federal funds for the unsupported payments of tenant rent and the missing certification and eligibility documentation.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-HOpenClosed$16,793Questioned 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 $16,793 from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to unreported income.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-IOpenClosed$9,892Funds 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.
Update its administrative plan to ensure that its policies are in accordance with HUD’s requirements and implement adequate quality control procedures to ensure that it correctly calculates housing assistance payments to ensure that $9,892 in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-JOpenClosed
Implement adequate quality control procedures to ensure that it (1) obtains and maintains required eligibility documentation in accordance with HUD’s requirements, (2) appropriately calculates and pays housing assistance and utility allowance reimbursements, and (3) completes household certifications in a timely manner.
- Status2019-CH-1002-001-KOpenClosed
Ensure that the abatement procedures implemented by the Commission are sufficient to ensure that housing quality standards are enforced.
2019-SE-1001 | December 21, 2018
The Tacoma, WA, Housing Authority Generally Satisfied RAD Requirements but Did Not Follow Its Moving to Work Policy by Conducting Annual Tenant Reexaminations for Its RAD Converted Units
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-SE-1001-001-AOpenClosed$1,071Questioned 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 the Authority to provide support for the $1,071 in unsupported assistance payments made in 2017 and reimburse its RAD-converted project-based voucher program using non-Federal funds for any amount that remains unsupported.
- Status2019-SE-1001-001-BOpenClosed$1,904Questioned 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 the Authority to reimburse its RAD-converted project-based voucher program $1,904 using non-Federal funds for the ineligible assistance payments made in 2017.
- Status2019-SE-1001-001-COpenClosed
Require the Authority to complete overdue annual reexaminations and reconcile corrections by reimbursing tenants and its RAD-converted project-based voucher program using non-Federal funds.
- Status2019-SE-1001-001-DOpenClosed
Conduct a review to determine whether the Authority is complying with the reexamination schedule in its Moving to Work policy and incorporate timely reexaminations in the risk management assessment.
2019-CH-1001 | December 20, 2018
The Housing Authority of the City of North Chicago, North Chicago, IL, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-CH-1001-001-AOpenClosed
Certify, along with the owners, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected for the 78 units cited in this finding.