The County does not reimburse itself with program funds for the $452,444 in County bond proceeds originally budgeted for the Armstrong Park project and used to pay for flood protection improvements in the Graue Mill subdivision in Hinsdale.
2017-CH-1010 | September 30, 2017
DuPage County, IL, Did Not Always Comply With Federal Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-CH-1010-001-AOpenClosed$452,444Funds 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.
- Status2017-CH-1010-001-BOpenClosed$7,677Funds 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.
The $7,677 ($460,121 - $452,444) in remaining County bond proceeds originally budgeted for the Armstrong Park project are used for eligible program activities.
- Status2017-CH-1010-001-COpenClosed$109,270Funds 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.
Deobligate the $109,270 in program funds obligated for ineligible activities in its construction contracts for the West Branch DuPage River Flood Control and Springbrook Culvert projects.
- Status2017-CH-1010-001-DOpenClosed$98,507Questioned 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 from non-Federal funds $98,507 for the program funds used for project management services without sufficient documentation to support that the use of the funds was reasonable.
- Status2017-CH-1010-001-EOpenClosed
Improve its procedures and controls to ensure that the County administers the program in accordance with Federal requirements.
2017-CH-1009 | September 30, 2017
The Owner and Management Agents Lacked Adequate Controls Over the Operation of Mary Scott Nursing Center, Dayton, OH
Housing
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-AOpenClosed$542,443Questioned 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 the project from nonproject funds for the $542,443 in disbursements from the project’s general operating fund account that was not used for reasonable operating expenses or necessary repairs of the project.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-BOpenClosed$384,772Funds 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 State from nonproject funds for the additional $384,772 in Medicaid overpayments.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-COpenClosed$189,524Questioned 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 project from nonproject funds for the $189,524, as appropriate, in disbursements from the project’s general operating fund account without sufficient documentation showing that the disbursements were for reasonable operating expenses of the project.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-DOpenClosed$20,000Questioned 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.
Support or reimburse the project from nonproject funds for the $20,000 value of the project’s van, which was transferred without sufficient documentation showing that the transfer was for reasonable operating expenses.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-EOpenClosed$51,261Questioned 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 project from nonproject funds for the $51,261, as appropriated, in credit card purchases without sufficient documentation showing that the purchases were for reasonable operating expenses or necessary repairs of the project.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-FOpenClosed$2,020Questioned 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 the project from nonproject funds for the $2,020 in credit card purchases that was not used for reasonable operating expenses of the project.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-GOpenClosed$5,302Questioned 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 the project from nonproject funds for the $5,302 in petty cash expenditures that was not used for reasonable operating expenses of the project.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-HOpenClosed$390,583Questioned 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.
Pay the project from nonproject funds for the $390,583 in uncollected rental revenue.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-IOpenClosed
Determine the market value of the operating rights for the 10 licensed beds sold in April 2015. If the licensed beds were sold for less than market value, the owner should reimburse the project from nonproject funds for the difference between the market value and the $150,000 sales price of the operating rights for the 10 licensed beds.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-JOpenClosed$1,591,849Funds 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 procedures and controls to ensure that it (1) uses project funds for reasonable operating expenses or necessary repairs of the project, (2) obtains HUD approval before disposing of the project’s assets, (3) receives market value for the sale of licensed beds, (4) obtains HUD approval for the entities selected to manage the project before entering into management agent agreements with the entities, (5) properly completes Medicaid applications, and (6) makes timely mortgage payments to prevent a $1,591,849 claim to HUD on the mortgage.
- Status2017-CH-1009-001-KOpenClosed
Work with the project’s owner and Greystone for the owner to develop an action plan to bring the owner current on the project’s mortgage, reserve for replacements, and taxes and insurance to prevent a claim to HUD on the mortgage.
2017-CH-1011 | September 30, 2017
BLM Companies LLC, Hurricane, UT, Did Not Provide Property Preservation and Protection Services in Accordance With Its Contract With HUD and Its Own Requirements
Housing
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-AOpenClosed
Certify and provide supporting documentation showing that the identified deficiencies have been corrected for the 8 of 109 properties cited in this audit report.
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-BOpenClosed$19,280Questioned 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 $19,280 in ineligible management fees for 20 properties for which initial services were improperly performed before promotion to ready-to-show status.
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-COpenClosed$6,525Questioned 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 $6,525 in ineligible routine inspection fees for 93 properties that contained property preservation and protection deficiencies.
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-DOpenClosed$594,000Funds 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.
Improve its quality control procedures to accurately track and conduct reviews in a manner that ensures all properties in its active inventory comply with HUD’s and its own requirements to prevent $594,000 in monthly routine inspection fees from being spent over the next year for properties that are not adequately maintained. The quality control procedures should include but not limited to continued training of BLM’s staff and subcontractors on properly identifying and addressing property deficiencies; maintaining sufficient documentation of its monthly quality control reviews and corrective actions; verifying that the datestamped photographs were for the corresponding inspection dates; and regularly updating its tracking mechanism for desktop reviews of inspections to ensure that it conducts desktop reviews for properties that are still in its inventory.