Reimburse HUD $52,932 from non-project funds for the overpayment of housing assistance and utility allowances due to incorrect calculations.
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.
- 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-CH-1004 | August 11, 2017
Alpine First Preston Joint Venture II, LLC, Alpine, UT, Did Not Always Comply With Its Contract With HUD and Its Own Requirements for the Marketing and Sale of HUD-Owned Properties in the State of IL
Housing
- Status2017-CH-1004-001-AOpenClosed
Implement adequate procedures and controls to ensure that it properly monitors the listing brokers to ensure compliance with its contract. The procedures and controls should include but not limited to performing quality control reviews and supervisory review of its brokers, and maintaining documentation of its quality control reviews and corrective actions.
- Status2017-CH-1004-001-BOpenClosed
Update its quality control plan to include the performance of physical inspections of the properties in its inventory.
2017-KC-0006 | July 14, 2017
HUD Did Not Conduct Rulemaking or Develop Formal Procedures for Its Single- Family Note Sales Program
Housing
- Status2017-KC-0006-001-AOpenClosed
Complete the rulemaking process for HUD’s single-family note sales program.
- Status2017-KC-0006-001-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement formal procedures and guidance for the note sales program.
2017-FW-1009 | June 29, 2017
Beverly Place Apartments Subsidized Nonexistent Tenants, Unqualified Tenants, and Tenants With Questionable Qualifications
Housing
- Status2017-FW-1009-001-AOpenClosed$574,930Questioned 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 Southwest Region Director of Multifamily Housing require Beverly Place’s owner to repay HUD $574,930 for subsidized units that were not occupied by qualified tenants. Repayment must be from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-FW-1009-001-BOpenClosed$150,082Questioned 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 Southwest Region Director of Multifamily Housing require Beverly Place’s owner to provide support to show that the subsidies for 11 tenants with falsified income were accurate or repay HUD $150,082 for those subsidies. Repayment must be from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-FW-1009-001-COpenClosed$77,621Questioned 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 Southwest Region Director of Multifamily Housing require Beverly Place’s owner to provide support to show that the subsidies for 18 tenants without files or without adequate income documentation in their files were accurate or repay HUD $77,621 for those subsidies. Repayment must be from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-FW-1009-001-DOpenClosed
We further recommend that the Southwest Region Director of Multifamily Housing require its contract administrator for Beverly Place to verify that the owner’s recently implemented quality control program is working as designed.
- Status2017-FW-1009-001-EOpenClosed
We further recommend that the Southwest Region Director of Multifamily Housing ensure that the project-based contract administrator’s review process includes steps to obtain reasonable assurance that tenants being reported as subsidized at Beverly Place live in the subsidized units.
2017-LA-1004 | June 13, 2017
Cypress Meadows Assisted Living, Antioch, CA, Was Not Administered in Accordance With Its Regulatory Agreement and HUD Requirements
Housing
- Status2017-LA-1004-001-COpenClosed$263,289Questioned 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 the project from non-project funds $263,289 for ineligible salary expenses.
- Status2017-LA-1004-001-DOpenClosed$283,307Funds 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.
Remove $283,307 in ineligible accrued salary fees payable from its financial statements and records and ensure that these expenses are not accrued or paid for with project funds.