Assist the Authority in obtaining any training needs identified by the review in recommendation 1A.
2017-SE-1002 | September 29, 2017
The Housing Authority of Snohomish County, Everett, WA, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Project-Based Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-SE-1002-001-BOpenClosed
- Status2017-SE-1002-001-COpenClosed
Require the Authority to submit evidence and its board of directors to certify to the Director of the Seattle Office of Public Housing that it has complied with regulatory requirements for each step of the project-based voucher process for each new project-based voucher project until such time as the Director of the Seattle Office of Public Housing believes the Authority understands and is consistently complying with the requirements.
2017-CF-1806 | September 28, 2017
Final Civil Action: PHH Corporation Settled Allegations of Failing To Comply With HUD’s Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
General Counsel
- Status2017-CF-1806-001-AOpenClosed$42,600,000Questioned 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.
Acknowledge that $42,600,000 of the $65,000,000 in the attached settlement agreement represents an amount due HUD, less DOJ’s civil debt collection fees.
2017-CF-1807 | September 28, 2017
Final Civil Action: Residential Home Funding Corp. Settled Allegations of Failing To Comply With HUD’s Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
General Counsel
- Status2017-CF-1807-001-AOpenClosed$1,670,000Questioned 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.
Acknowledge that $1,670,000 in the attached settlement represents an amount due HUD less DOJ’s civil debt collection fees.
2017-LA-1803 | September 28, 2017
RMS & Associates, Las Vegas, NV, Improperly Originated FHA-Insured Loans With Restrictive Covenants
General Counsel
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-EOpenClosed
Determine legal sufficiency and if legally sufficient, pursue civil and administrative remedies, civil money penalties, or both against RMS, its principals, or both for incorrectly certifying to the eligibility for FHA mortgage insurance or that due diligence was exercised during the origination of FHA loans.
Housing
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-AOpenClosed$2,460,446Funds 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.
Work with HUD to nullify the restrictions on conveyance that violate HUD policy or indemnify HUD. This action will protect HUD against future losses of $2,434,204 for the 49 loans.
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-BOpenClosed$26,242Questioned 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 HUD $26,242 for partial claims paid on two FHA loans that contained prohibited restrictive covenants.
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-COpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to identify prohibited restrictions on conveyance to ensure that it does not originate FHA loans with prohibited restrictive covenants.
2017-AT-1013 | September 28, 2017
The City of Chattanooga, TN, Did Not Always Administer Its ESG Program in Accordance With HUD’s Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-AT-1013-001-AOpenClosed$705Questioned 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 ESG program participants $705 from non-Federal funds for the inadequately supported pay request.
- Status2017-AT-1013-001-BOpenClosed$13,058Questioned 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 HUD $13,058 from non-Federal funds for the drawdowns after program grant expiration.
- Status2017-AT-1013-001-COpenClosed
Implement adequate policies and procedures to ensure that payments to subrecipients are issued in accordance with HUD’s requirements.
- Status2017-AT-1013-001-DOpenClosed
Provide adequate training to staff associated with the administration of the ESG program to ensure compliance with HUD’s requirements, including timely drawdowns.
- Status2017-AT-1013-001-EOpenClosed
Implement adequate policies and procedures for conducting complete and consistent monitoring of subrecipients’ matching requirements, including confirming eligibility and existence of matching funds to ensure compliance with HUD’s requirements.
2017-CH-1008 | September 28, 2017
Travelers Aid Society of Metropolitan Detroit, Detroit, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Continuum of Care Program in Accordance With Federal Regulations
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-CH-1008-001-AOpenClosed$1,776,381Questioned 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.
Support that it met its $526,170 matching contribution requirement associated with the more than $2.1 million in program funds it drew down for supportive services and administrative expenses. If Travelers Aid cannot provide sufficient support, it should reimburse HUD $1,776,381 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-CH-1008-001-BOpenClosed$305,936Questioned 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 HUD from non-Federal funds for the $305,936 in program administrative funds for which it did not provide sufficient documentation to support that the funds were used for eligible administrative expenses associated with the project for which the funds were drawn.
- Status2017-CH-1008-001-COpenClosed$170,995Questioned 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 HUD from non-Federal funds for the $170,995 in program income for which it did not provide sufficient documentation to support that the funds were used for the project that generated the income ($147,534) and for eligible activities ($23,461).
- Status2017-CH-1008-001-DOpenClosed$54,770Questioned 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 HUD from non-Federal funds for the $54,770 in program funds for which it did not provide sufficient documentation to support that the funds were used for eligible project expenses for supportive services ($26,036) and leasing ($28,734).
- Status2017-CH-1008-001-EOpenClosed$1,165Questioned 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 HUD from non-Federal funds for the $1,165 in program funds used for improper supportive service expenses.
- Status2017-CH-1008-001-FOpenClosed
Implement adequate procedures and controls to ensure that it maintains sufficient documentation to support that matching contributions, program funds, and program income are accounted for and used in accordance with Federal regulations and it uses program funds for the projects in accordance with Federal regulations.
- Status2017-CH-1008-001-GOpenClosed
Provide technical assistance to Travelers Aid to ensure that its staff is adequately trained on how to account for and use matching contributions, program funds, and program income in accordance with Federal regulations.