Ensure that the $65,000 microenterprise activity awarded to West Mesa CDC for fiscal year 2019 meets CDBG requirements or amend the use of funding to another CDBG-eligible activity.
2020-LA-1003 | April 13, 2020
The City of Mesa, AZ, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-GOpenClosed$65,000Funds 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.
Closed on June 17, 2021 - Status2020-LA-1003-001-HOpenClosed$192,563Questioned 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.
Closed on April 26, 2022Support that the Ability360 Mesa Home Accessibility activity for fiscal years 2015, 2016, and 2017 followed HUD requirements and its subrecipient agreement or repay its program $192,563 from non-Federal funds. This includes supporting that all activities met the national objective requirements and were for rental properties, contracts were properly procured, the 10 percent match subrecipient agreement requirement was met ($4,293) and properly accounted for, and contract expenses were adequately supported ($228).
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-IOpenClosed$6,809Funds 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.
Closed on March 25, 2022Ensure that the $6,809 allocated for the Mesa Home Accessibility activity for fiscal year 2017 meets HUD requirements or amend the use of funding to another CDBG-eligible activity.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-JOpenClosedClosed on March 25, 2021
Implement and reinforce its policies and procedures that require the City and its subrecipients to maintain adequate documentation to support the City’s CDBG program activities and maintain adequate documentation of subrecipient monitoring reviews. This includes tracking the status of monitoring reviews, communicating findings to subrecipients, and adequately resolving findings in a timely manner.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-KOpenClosed$105,688Questioned 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.
Closed on March 31, 2021Support that the findings for the fiscal years 2011 and 2014 NEDCO activity were adequately resolved or repay its program $105,688 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-LOpenClosed$153,191Funds 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.
Closed on March 09, 2021Ensure that the remaining $153,191 budgeted for the 2010 NEDCO activity meets HUD requirements or amend the use of funds to another CDBG-eligible activity.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-MOpenClosedClosed on March 09, 2021
Develop and implement procedures to ensure that City employees responsible for desk and onsite monitoring reviews and its subrecipients are aware of HUD and subrecipient requirements for each type of activity funded.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-NOpenClosedClosed on March 30, 2021
Improve and implement its desk and onsite monitoring policies and procedures to strengthen its capacity to perform effective desk and onsite monitoring reviews of subrecipients and for using a risk assessment to schedule monitoring visits.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-OOpenClosedClosed on March 09, 2021
Develop and implement policies and procedures for reviewing expenses charged to CDBG from other City departments.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-POpenClosedClosed on May 27, 2021
Develop and implement a recurring training plan for City CDBG staff to ensure knowledge of HUD regulations and requirements.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-QOpenClosedClosed on March 24, 2022
Document and submit all activities to HUD for written approval to ensure that they are eligible activities that meet the CDBG national objective requirements before funding until recommendations 1B, 1J, and 1M to 1P are adequately implemented. This should include documenting all correspondence with HUD, including review and approval.
- Status2020-LA-1003-001-ROpenClosedClosed on March 28, 2022
Document and submit all payments to HUD for written approval before reimbursement until recommendations 1B, 1J, and 1M to 1P are adequately implemented. This should include documenting all correspondence with HUD, including review and approval.
2020-CH-0002 | March 20, 2020
HUD May Be Able To Improve Its Cash Flow Model To Estimate and Reestimate the Credit Subsidy for Cohorts of Mortgages Within the Section 232 Program
Housing
- Status2020-CH-0002-001-AOpenClosedClosed on March 17, 2020
Continue testing the financial and credit history variables, including default data, and include the appropriate reliable and sufficient variables for the cash flow model used to estimate and reestimate the credit subsidy for the cohorts of mortgages within the Section 232 program.
2020-BO-1002 | March 19, 2020
The Housing Authority of the City of Springfield, MA, Did Not Always Comply With Procurement and Contract Administration Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-AOpenClosed$916,132Questioned 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.
Closed on November 03, 2020Support that $916,132 spent on contracts was fair and reasonable in accordance with Federal requirements or repay the Operating Fund or Capital Fund program from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported.
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-BOpenClosed$408,968Funds 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.
Closed on November 03, 2020Support that $408,968 in funds not yet spent on contracts would be fair and reasonable or reallocate the funds to ensure that they will be put to their intended use.
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-COpenClosedClosed on October 06, 2020
Reprocure any contracts for which cost reasonableness cannot be supported and contracts were not properly awarded to ensure compliance with HUD requirements.
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-DOpenClosedClosed on June 23, 2020
Ensure that all Authority staff members working with procurements and contract administration receive Federal procurement training.
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-EOpenClosedClosed on June 22, 2020
Establish and implement adequate record-keeping procedures to comply with Federal procurement requirements, including a checklist for the file to ensure that they complete all procurement requirements and receive all required documents.
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-FOpenClosedClosed on November 19, 2020
Ensure that all architectural and engineering contracts or task orders awarded during our audit period are reviewed for cost reasonableness.
- Status2020-BO-1002-002-AOpenClosed$37,941Questioned 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.
Closed on November 03, 2020Repay the Operating Fund program from non-Federal funds for the $37,941 in ineligible costs when the amount paid exceeded the contract value.