Support the reasonableness of the $110,000 Graffiti Removal program (activities 504 and 520) cost allocations or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
2017-LA-1005 | June 16, 2017
The City of Huntington Park, CA, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program in Accordance With Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-LA-1005-001-DOpenClosed$110,000Questioned 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.
- Status2017-LA-1005-001-EOpenClosed$31,186Questioned 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 $31,186 After School program (activity 501) costs, including the reasonableness of the contract costs and meeting the limited clientele national objective, or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-LA-1005-001-FOpenClosed$95,736Questioned 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 reasonableness of the $95,736 in cost allocations charged as CDBG administrative (activity 522) costs or repay the costs from non-Federal funds.
2017-PH-1003 | May 22, 2017
The Yorkville Cooperative, Fairfax, VA, Did Not Administer Its HUD-Insured Property and Housing Assistance Contract According to Applicable Requirements
Housing
- Status2017-PH-1003-001-AOpenClosed$970,381Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to show that prices paid for purchases of products and services totaling $970,381 were fair and reasonable or reimburse the project from nonproject funds for any amounts that were not fair and reasonable.
2017-NY-1008 | March 09, 2017
The Irvington, NJ, Housing Authority Did Not Always Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With Program Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-AOpenClosed$88,534Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide supporting documentation to justify the $88,534 in unsupported travel and training costs related to out-of-State trainings, meetings, and conferences. Any amount determined to be ineligible should be repaid from non-Federal funds to the Operating Fund.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-BOpenClosed$27,599Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide supporting documentation to justify the $27,599 in unsupported training travel and per diem expenses related to quarterly meetings and trainings offered by HAI. Any amount determined to be ineligible should be repaid from non-Federal funds to the Operating Fund.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-COpenClosed$27,487Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide supporting documentation to justify the $27,487 reimbursed to Authority officials for various costs, such as health coverage waiver incentives, supplies, food, and decorations. Any amount determined to be ineligible should be repaid from non-Federal funds to the Operating Fund.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-EOpenClosed$61,145Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to reimburse the Operating Fund from non-Federal funds for $61,145 in ineligible expenditures for personal expenses, such as meals, grocery items, gift cards, flowers, golf, an award dinner, Costco and AAA memberships, and a church deduction.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-FOpenClosed$8,190Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to reimburse the Operating Fund from non-Federal funds for $8,190 in ineligible salary advance.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-GOpenClosed$4,048Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to reimburse the Operating Fund from non-Federal funds for the $4,048 in ineligible civil service fines.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-HOpenClosed$90,000Questioned 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.
We recommend that the Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to obtain retroactive approval from HUD for the $90,000 lawsuit settlement related to a former employee. If approval is not obtained, the Authority should reimburse $90,000 to the Operating Fund from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-JOpenClosed$13,340Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide documentation to support that $13,340 in rent collected in March 2016 was deposited into an appropriate bank account or repay the Operating Fund from non-Federal funds for any amount not properly deposited.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-KOpenClosed$106,971Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide documentation to justify the $106,971 in unsupported rent that was written off for 52 tenants. Any amount determined to be ineligible should be repaid from non-Federal funds to the Operating Fund.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-MOpenClosed$21,857Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to reimburse the program income account from non-Federal funds for $21,857 in ineligible expenditures for golf outings, banquets, or dinner shows.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-NOpenClosed$37,671Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide documentation to justify $37,671 that did not have receipts or other support showing how these transactions were used for low-income housing and benefited the residents or repay the program income account from non-Federal funds for any amount not supported.
- Status2017-NY-1008-001-POpenClosed$710,721Questioned 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 Acting Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing instruct Authority officials to provide documentation to show that the $710,721 paid for services procured was for costs that were reasonable or repay from non-Federal funds approximately $500,000 to the Operating Fund and approximately $200,000 to the Capital Fund. Footnote: Regulations at 24 CFR 905.306(f) require that all capital funds be spent within 48 months after the date on which they become available. Funds that have not been properly spent within 48 months have to be recaptured and returned to the U.S. Treasury.
2017-LA-0003 | March 02, 2017
HUD Failed To Adequately Oversee FHA-Insured Loans With Borrower-Financed Downpayment Assistance
Housing
- Status2017-LA-0003-001-AOpenClosed
Reconsider HUD’s position on questioned borrower-financed downpayment assistance programs, including an analysis of the financial impact to FHA borrowers, risk to the FHA program, and whether current statute prohibits borrower-financed downpayment assistance programs as they are currently structured.
- Status2017-LA-0003-001-COpenClosed
Develop specific requirements and guidance for lenders to review HFA downpayment assistance programs (for example, interest rates, fees, borrower certifications, lender reviews, impact to borrower, related agreements, etc.). Requirements and guidance should include evaluating the structure of downpayment assistance programs, including whether the programs’ structure and funding mechanisms comply with all HUD requirements and guidelines.
- Status2017-LA-0003-001-DOpenClosed
Require lenders to obtain a borrower certification that details their participation in an HFA downpayment assistance program, including relevant details of the specific program (for example, impact on interest rate, mortgage payments, fees, equity, acknowledgement of other less costly loan products, etc.).
- Status2017-LA-0003-001-EOpenClosed
Ensure that lenders enter accurate and missing downpayment assistance gift data into FHA Connection when identified by HUD.