Determine whether it would be beneficial for HUD to conduct a Part 50 environmental review of the development or if the Authority should conduct a Part 58 environmental review, and implement the decision to ensure that the environmental review is conducted as soon as possible as required under the action plan.

Continue to provide training and technical assistance to ensure that the Authority understands relevant requirements for the various asset repositioning options, including milestone and disposition requirements.

Provide certifications and supporting documentation to show that it has identified and addressed urgent health and safety issues at the development, such as flooded stairwells, accessible crawlspaces, and unsecured windows and doors.

Develop and implement a plan to routinely identify and address recurring urgent health and safety issues such as flooded stairwells, accessible crawlspaces, and unsecured windows and doors while the property remains vacant and throughout future asset repositioning efforts.

Develop and implement a plan to use available asset repositioning options for the remaining 284 public housing units at the Commodore Perry Homes development, including 274 dwelling units and 10 nondwelling units.

Develop and implement a plan for the original property related to the 46 units converted under the RAD transfer of assistance option to ensure that the property and proceeds from its disposition are used in accordance with requirements.

If the Authority does not follow through on its asset repositioning plans, misses deadlines, or it otherwise becomes clear that the plan is no longer feasible, work with the HUD’s Special Applications Center, Office of Recapitalization, and other offices as appropriate, to consider and use available remedies such as revoking approval and enforcing required conversion.

Revise its methodology to identify slow spenders, including appropriate baselines and the definition of slow spenders.

Update its policies and procedures for tracking expenditures related to slow-spending grantees, including steps for assisting the grantees to expedite spending (including the grantee’s steps or actions to address slow spending), identifying the reasons for the delays with the grant, and documenting the outcome of its efforts.

Corrective Action Taken

CPD updated guidance addressing grantee slow spending through technical assistance, including actions grant managers can take when grantee expenditures do not appear to be “on pace” to meet the expenditure deadlines, and demonstrated it is providing technical assistance to grantees during monitoring. CPD also issued an additional Standard Monitoring Findings and Corrective Actions Guide for its staff to promote a consistent framework for crafting monitoring findings and the corrective actions needed to resolve identified deficiencies and prevent future occurrences. This new resource provides general guidance and examples for presenting Finding components in monitoring reports for fourteen topics including, “Failure to Meet Timeliness of Expenditures Requirements.

Establish a reasonable timeframe for grantees to resolve DRGR flags or at a minimum, if a flag cannot be resolved within the established timeframe, have the grantee provide a remediating comment explaining why the flag could not be resolved and a proposed timeline for resolution.

Resolve or remediate outstanding flags for grants B-12-MT-01-0001, B-13-MS-36-0002, B-16-MH-48-0001, and B-16-DL-12-0001 in DRGR.

Require updated projections for grants B-12-MT-01-0001, B-13-MS-36-0002, and B-16-DL-12-0001 and provide assistance to the grantees to ensure that the expenditure deadlines will be met.

Update its policies and procedures to require grantees to identify the reason for variances between the actual and projected expenditures to enhance CPD’s oversight.

Update monitoring exhibit 6-1 to include (1) reasons for differences between actual and estimated projections and (2) a question to determine whether the grantee is meeting the timelines established and if the timelines are not met, providing reasons.

Update policies and procedures to require CPD staff to sufficiently document its basis for conclusions to meet the monitoring handbook and QPR checklist requirements and intentions.

Consider suggestions made by grantees to assist with the progress of spending funds and provide support for the guidance it plans to share with grantees based on these suggestions. (See bullets under Grantees Generally Considered CPD’s Assistance With the Progress of Their Grants Helpful.)

We recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to include milestones and appropriate consequences for not meeting those milestones in future subrecipient agreements to ensure that expenditure deadlines remain on track. Implementing this recommendation could assist the Texas GLO in avoiding possible future litigation based on the lack of required benchmarks in its contracts.

We recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to provide its plan to ensure that processes are in place to assist those participants transitioning from the City’s programs to the Texas GLO’s programs.

With HUD’s approval of action plan amendment 8, we recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to provide its plan to continuously monitor the City’s pace and performance in its remaining Hurricane Harvey CDBG-DR program and take appropriate action to ensure that program goals are met. The plan should include a process for repurposing additional grant funds, if necessary, to avoid potential recapture due to the City’s inability to meet the expenditure deadline established under its subrecipient agreement with the Texas GLO and to allow the Texas GLO to meet the expenditure deadline for its grant award.

With HUD’s approval of action plan amendment 8, we recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to set performance and financial milestones, including approval of the City’s projects and obligation and expenditure of funds, for all programs and activities funded under the City’s subrecipient agreement through the remainder of the contract and deadlines for the City to achieve those milestones. This requirement would include the Texas GLO’s (1) providing its plan to continually assess whether the City is meeting the established milestones within the prescribed period; (2) taking appropriate action as outlined in the subrecipient agreement for any missed deadlines; and (3) if necessary, determining whether programs need to be combined or eliminated from the subrecipient agreement.