We recommend that HUD’s Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single Family Housing assess BLM’s performance under the area 1D contract at least quarterly to determine whether it has improved its performance. If its performance does not improve, coordinate with the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer to determine whether BLM was in default of its contract and take appropriate action.
2017-FW-1011 | August 29, 2017
BLM Companies LLC Failed To Ensure That It Protected and Preserved HUD Properties Under Its Field Service Manager Contract for Area 1D
Housing
- Status2017-FW-1011-001-HOpenClosed
2017-CH-1005 | August 25, 2017
Stone Terrace Apartments, Chicago, IL, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program
Housing
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-AOpenClosed$52,932Questioned 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 $52,932 from non-project funds for the overpayment of housing assistance and utility allowances due to incorrect calculations.
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-BOpenClosed$566Funds 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 $566 from non-project funds for the underpayment of housing assistance due to incorrect calculations.
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-COpenClosed$32,334Questioned 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 $32,334 for the overpayment of housing assistance due to unreported, and underreported income, or income reported late. This reimbursement is either from non-project funds or collections from applicable households.
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-DOpenClosed$6,444Questioned 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 $6,444 from non-project funds for the unsupported payments of housing assistance cited in the finding.
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-EOpenClosed$76,107Funds 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.
Implement adequate quality control procedures to ensure that housing assistance payments are appropriately calculated and supported. These procedures and controls should ensure that $76,107 in program funds are appropriately used for future payments.
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-FOpenClosed
Document the implementation of the quality control plan and the completed reviews of the tenant certification process.
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-GOpenClosed
Revise its occupancy standards to include policies and procedures to prevent underuse of the project’s units.
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-HOpenClosed
Review and update the project’s internal transfer waiting list to include the applicants’ move-in dates, and the project’s external waiting list to include notations showing the reasons why applicants were not admitted into the project’s program and why applicants were bypassed.
- Status2017-CH-1005-001-IOpenClosed
Develop and implement adequate procedures and controls to ensure that the project complies with HUD’s requirements and its own policies regarding the management of its waiting list.
2017-LA-1007 | August 24, 2017
The Chukchansi Indian Housing Authority, Oakhurst, CA, Did Not Always Follow HUD’s Requirements for Its Indian Housing Block Grant Program
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-LA-1007-001-AOpenClosed$308,657Funds 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.
Recapture the $248,222 in excess program funds from the Authority and allocate in the pool for other tribes to use in meeting program objectives.
- Status2017-LA-1007-001-BOpenClosed$1,746,658Questioned 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 source documentation to determine the accuracy of the tribal enrollment numbers reported in 2015 and 2016. Based on those supported numbers, HUD should recapture or offset the unsupported amounts from the awarded $1,746,658 in program funds that resulted from under or overstated tribal enrollment numbers.
- Status2017-LA-1007-001-COpenClosed
Require the Authority to establish and implement controls and formal written policies and procedures to ensure that accurate tribal enrollment numbers are reported to the Formula Service Center and HUD for future grant years.
- Status2017-LA-1007-002-AOpenClosed$548Questioned 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 the eligibility of the reported $548 in unsupported program costs or repay its program using non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-LA-1007-002-BOpenClosed
Implement controls to ensure that all future check request forms are complete for proper tracking in its accounting records and authorized approver verifies source documentation is attached prior to check issuance for future program expenses as required by its own policies and procedures.
2017-AT-1801 | August 21, 2017
Final Civil Action: Prospect Mortgage, LLC, Settled Alleged Violations of Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
General Counsel
- Status2017-AT-1801-001-AOpenClosed$2,930,000Questioned 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 $2.93 million in the attached settlement agreement represents an amount due HUD, less DOJ’s civil debt collection fees. (Footnote 2 - DOJ’s 1994 Appropriation Act (Public Law 103-121) authorized DOJ to retain up to 3 percent of all amounts collected as the result of its civil debt collection litigation activities.)
2017-CF-1804 | August 21, 2017
Final Civil Action: Financial Freedom, a Division of CIT Bank, N.A., Settled Allegations of Failing To Comply With HUD’s Federal Housing Administration Servicing Requirements for HECM Claims
General Counsel
- Status2017-CF-1804-001-AOpenClosed$41,000,000Questioned 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 $41 million of the $89,274,944 in the attached settlement represents an amount due HUD, less DOJ’s civil debt collection fees.
2017-CF-0801 | August 21, 2017
HUD Needs To Clarify Whether Illegal-Undocumented Aliens Are Eligible for Assistance Under the Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS Program
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-CF-0801-001-AOpenClosed
Clarify whether assistance provided under its community development programs, such as HOPWA, are considered “Federal public benefits” and are, therefore, subject to PRWORA’s noncitizen eligibility restrictions.
- Status2017-CF-0801-001-BOpenClosed
Consult with the Office of the Attorney General to establish whether HOPWA and other homeless assistance programs are a Federal public benefit that meets the definition of “providing assistance for the protection of life or safety” and are, therefore, exempt from PRWORA noncitizen eligibility restrictions.
2017-AT-1011 | August 21, 2017
The Lexington Housing Authority, Lexington, NC, Did Not Administer Its RAD Conversion in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-AT-1011-001-AOpenClosed
Provide adequate supporting documentation for the amount of Public Housing Capital Fund loan to verify the loan source. If another source of Federal funds is determined, repay the amount to the appropriate program from non-Federal funds.