Issue guidance to PHAs to ensure any applicant for or tenant of public or assisted housing whose name appears on the SAM excluded parties list are reviewed by PHAs to determine eligibility in a manner consistent with the regulations in 2 CFR 180 and 2424 so that ineligible applicants or tenants are not admitted or recertified to put up to $13.7 million to better use.
2019-KC-0002 | June 25, 2019
HUD Paid Rental Subsidies To Benefit Public Housing and Voucher Tenants Reported as Excluded From Federal Programs or Deceased
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-KC-0002-001-AOpenClosed$13,669,007Funds 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.
- Status2019-KC-0002-001-BOpenClosed$6,094,183Funds 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.
Take corrective actions for the 729 tenants reported as deceased to put $6.1 million to better use.
- Status2019-KC-0002-001-COpenClosed
Establish a method to provide information in the Do Not Pay system to PHAs and require its use.
2019-FW-1004 | June 17, 2019
The City of Dallas, Dallas, TX, Did Not Follow Environmental Requirements or Effectively Manage Its Community Housing Development Organizations
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-FW-1004-001-AOpenClosed$2,451,097Questioned 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 the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to repay $2,398,872 from non-Federal funds to the City’s HOME program for funds committed to projects before the completion of an environmental review or HUD approval.
- Status2019-FW-1004-001-BOpenClosed$424,325Questioned 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 the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to support or repay $424,325 from non-Federal funds to the City’s HOME program for funds committed without documentation of an environmental review.
- Status2019-FW-1004-001-COpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to comply with HOME’s environmental requirements, including required restrictive contract language, and maintaining documentation of environmental reviews.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-AOpenClosed$1,959,913Questioned 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 the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to support or repay $1,959,913 from non-Federal funds to the City’s Community Development Block Grant program for funds expended for Serenity Place Apartments because the City cannot locate any of the project files.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-BOpenClosed$1,676,716Questioned 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 the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to support or repay $1,402,875 from non-Federal funds to the City’s HOME program for CHDO draws paid with no supporting documentation.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-COpenClosed$180,051Questioned 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 the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to support or repay $80,842 in program income from non-Federal funds to the City’s HOME program.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-DOpenClosed$105Questioned 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 the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to repay $105 in ineligible costs from non-Federal funds to the City’s HOME program.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-EOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to strengthen and comply with its underwriting and project evaluation policies and procedures, including ensuring that when it signs and commits funds, project construction can begin within 12 months.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-FOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to develop and implement policies and procedures on documentation required to support draws.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-GOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to comply with requirements to obtain the required income documentation, including ensuring that employees know and apply the requirements.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-HOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to develop and implement policies and procedures to review source income documentation as required by the HOME regulations.
- Status2019-FW-1004-002-IOpenClosed
We recommend that the Director of the Fort Worth Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to develop and implement policies and procedures for documenting the results of its recertification procedures, including documenting the results of unpaid taxes, the resolution of CHDO audit findings, and the resolution of ineligible CHDO board members or employees because of a SAM search.
2019-AT-1004 | June 14, 2019
The North Carolina Department of Commerce Did Not Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Grants as Required by HUD
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-AOpenClosed$417,113Funds 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.
Put $417,113 in unspent NSP1 funds associated with three activities to better use by reprogramming the funds to other subrecipients using an appropriate method or return the funds to HUD.
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-BOpenClosed$1,300,000Questioned 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 its NSP1 grant $1,300,000 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported reallocation of grant funds.
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-COpenClosed
Establish and implement a written policy and procedures to recapture and reallocate unused NSP funds in a timely manner.
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-DOpenClosed$1,186,105Questioned 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 NSP grant $1,186,105 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported subrecipient and administrative expenditures.
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-EOpenClosed
Update its records retention policy to meet HUD’s records retention requirements for supporting documentation for Federal program expenses, including salaries.