We recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to review Harris County’s Housing Reimbursement Program policies, including assistance prioritization, to ensure compliance with the Texas GLO’s action plan and amendments. This would include the Texas GLO analyzing the County’s project pipeline to determine whether changes are warranted to ensure that those most in need are prioritized to receive limited Federal assistance. The Texas GLO should provide HUD with an analysis of the County’s project pipeline within 90 days of its review to share the results and demonstrate compliance with its action plan.
2021-FW-1001 | June 02, 2021
Harris County Community Services Department, Houston, TX, Was Inefficient and Ineffective in Operating Its Hurricane Harvey Program
Community Planning and Development
- Status2021-FW-1001-001-EOpenClosed
2020-OE-0003 | April 12, 2021
HUD Program Offices’ Policies and Approaches for Radon
Community Planning and Development
- Status2020-OE-0003-01OpenClosedPriorityPriority
We believe these open recommendations, if implemented, will have the greatest impact on helping HUD achieve its mission to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all.
Develop and issue a departmentwide policy that notes that radon is a radioactive substance and outlines HUD's requirements to test for and mitigate excessive radon levels in accordance with 24 CFR 50.3(i)(1) and 58.5(i)(2)(i).
Corrective Action Taken
None Given.
- Status2020-OE-0003-02OpenClosed
Develop and provide training for applicable program staff, grantees, and PHAs on radon testing and mitigation requirements.
- Status2020-OE-0003-03OpenClosed
Develop and implement an effective radon policy to ensure that CPD program activities comply with the departmentwide policy on radon testing and mitigation requirements.
2021-LA-1002 | January 05, 2021
Neighborhood Housing Services of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Follow Program Requirements in Administering Its NSP2
Community Planning and Development
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-AOpenClosed$3,425,679Questioned 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 support that program activities within NHSLA’s interfund were for eligible NSP2 activities or repay the program $3,425,679 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-BOpenClosed$529,745Funds 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.
Return the outstanding balance of $529,745 owed to NSP2. In addition, cease the practice of depositing NSP2 funds in non-NSP2 accounts and making them available to be used or borrowed for non-NSP2 activities.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-COpenClosed$658,261Questioned 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 support that $658,261 in loan proceeds was used for an eligible NSP2 activity or property or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-DOpenClosed$500,000Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to support that $500,000 in NSP funds transferred to the revolving loan fund was used for an eligible NSP2 activity or property or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-EOpenClosed
Develop and implement sufficient financial procedures and controls to ensure that program income is appropriately recorded and properly transferred to its NSP2 account.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-FOpenClosed
Ensure it has sufficient staffing and capacity to administer the NSP2 program, including obtaining training for its staff to understand HUD requirements and how to use the DRGR system.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-GOpenClosed
Amend the NSP2 action plan to include its revolving loan fund.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-HOpenClosed
Adjust program income calculation methodology to ensure it is in accordance with HUD requirements.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-IOpenClosed
Submit overdue NSP2 quarterly reports to DRGR and update prior reports that did not accurately report program income activity.
- Status2021-LA-1002-002-AOpenClosed$1,388,545Questioned 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 adequate documentation to support its administrative and project delivery cost expenditures or repay the program $1,388,545 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2021-LA-1002-002-BOpenClosed$324,478Funds 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.
Provide supporting documentation to show whether the outstanding liability of $324,478 is correctly classified as an NSP2 liability. If not, HUD should ensure that NHSLA corrects its NSP2 cost reimbursement summary for the 12 months ending June 30, 2018, to reclassify the expenses to a non-NSP2 program. Such funds would be considered funds to be put to better use.
- Status2021-LA-1002-002-COpenClosed
Develop and implement a HUD-approved cost allocation plan to properly account for indirect program costs.
- Status2021-LA-1002-002-DOpenClosed
Establish written payroll policies and procedures in accordance with program requirements for the tracking, recording, and maintenance of direct costs to ensure that time distribution records are in place to support the allocation of charges.
- Status2021-LA-1002-002-EOpenClosed
Obtain training to ensure that it understands NSP2 regulations and requirements related to payroll allocation for its administrative and project delivery costs and program income calculation methodology to ensure it properly computes the amount it is allowed to charge for administrative costs.
- Status2021-LA-1002-003-AOpenClosed$856,692Questioned 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 South Gate contract or repay NSP2 $856,692 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2021-LA-1002-003-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement additional procedures and controls to ensure that HUD procurement requirements are followed.