We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to provide documentation to show that the $217,403 paid for legal, fee accounting, management consulting, and auditing services was reasonable or reimburse its Capital Fund or Operating Fund from non-Federal funds for any amount that it cannot support or that is not considered reasonable.
2017-NY-1013 | September 28, 2017
The New Brunswick Housing Authority, NJ, Did Not Always Administer Its Operating and Capital Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-BOpenClosed$217,403Questioned 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.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-COpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to provide training to its staff related to HUD and Federal procurement requirements, including the requirements for using intergovernmental agreements and preparing independent cost estimates and cost analyses.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-DOpenClosed$187,492Questioned 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 Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to provide documentation to show that $187,492 in 2013 and 2014 capital fund obligations or reimburse HUD from non-Federal funds for any amount that it cannot support.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-EOpenClosed$139,423Questioned 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 Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to reimburse HUD $139,423 in replacement housing factor funds not disbursed by the expenditure deadline from its replacement housing factor funds or reduce its future capital funds.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-FOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to improve its policies and procedures to ensure that capital funds, including replacement housing factor funds, are obligated and spent for eligible activities in a timely manner.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-GOpenClosed$87,116Questioned 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 Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to reimburse its project from non-Federal funds for $87,116 in excessive management fees charged for units undergoing demolition.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-HOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to submit a request to the HUD field office to revise its budget so that it reflects actual expenditures for 2014 capital funds.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-IOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing to require the Authority to improve its policies and procedures to ensure that its budget, financial reports, and accounting data are accurate and up to date.
- Status2017-NY-1013-001-JOpenClosed
We also recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing consider reducing future capital funds as a penalty for the Authority’s obligating its 2009, 2010, and 2011 replacement housing factor funds after the deadline.
2017-PH-1007 | September 28, 2017
The Chester Housing Authority, Chester, PA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-PH-1007-001-AOpenClosed
Certify, along with the owners of the 61 units cited in the finding, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected.
- Status2017-PH-1007-001-BOpenClosed$46,605Questioned 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 $46,605 from non-Federal funds ($44,214 for housing assistance payments and $2,391 in associated administrative fees) for the 22 units that materially failed to meet HUD’s housing quality standards.
- Status2017-PH-1007-001-COpenClosed$2,668,680Funds 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.
Develop and implement procedures and controls to monitor the inspection process to ensure that program units meet housing quality standards, thereby ensuring that an estimated $2,668,680 in program funds is spent for units that are decent, safe, and sanitary.
2017-KC-1003 | September 26, 2017
Majestic Management, LLC, St. Louis, MO, a Management Agent for the East St. Louis Housing Authority, Mismanaged Its Public Housing Program
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-AOpenClosed
Require the Authority to require Majestic Management to develop and implement a process to ensure that it makes any needed adjustments to employee payroll and transfers accurate amounts from the project accounts for payroll.
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-BOpenClosed
Require the Authority to require Majestic Management to design and implement a process to ensure that actual staff hours are accurately tracked and only dedicated employees are paid from project funds.
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-COpenClosed$1,136,046Questioned 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 and Majestic Management to support $568,023 spent on payroll allocated to the projects or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-DOpenClosed$219,330Questioned 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 and Majestic Management to reimburse from non-Federal funds the $109,665 in ineligible expenses that Majestic Management charged to the projects.
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-EOpenClosed
Require the Authority and Majestic Management to repay any excessive annual leave that Majestic Management paid to its employees from project funds when its contract terminated in 2017.
- Status2017-KC-1003-002-AOpenClosed
Require the Authority to provide training on procurement requirements in public housing to all Majestic Management employees working at the projects.
- Status2017-KC-1003-002-BOpenClosed$974,844Questioned 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 and Majestic Management to support that the $487,422 spent on goods and services for the projects was a reasonable cost and the goods and services were procured from eligible vendors or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-KC-1003-002-COpenClosed
Require the Authority to review all other payments to the sampled vendors to confirm that the costs were reasonable and the goods and services were procured from eligible vendors or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.