We recommend that HUD require the City to support or repay, from nonfederal funds, $5,078 in the square footage overcharge for work not completed, according to the project design and invoice documentation.

We recommend that HUD require the City to provide supporting documentation for the 4 program participants that did not have adequate income documentation. If the supporting documentation cannot be provided, repay, from nonfederal funds, $99,347.

We recommend that HUD require the City to since the property updates have been completed for the 24 program participants that did not receive the green infrastructure training, provide documentation that any subsequent program participants completed the green infrastructure training workshop before the grant agreement is signed and construction begins.

Develop comprehensive guidance and training for grantees on how to prepare the PR 29 report to ensure that the information collected is reliable, accurate, timely, and in compliance with the Uniform Administrative Guidance for Grants and Cooperative Agreements, specifically 2 CFR 200.302(a)(b) and 2 CFR 200.303

Determine whether the funds that were drawn in error need to be repaid to HUD and whether other remediation actions are appropriate.

Follow up with the four grantees without adequate supporting documentation and assess their compliance with the financial management requirements in 2 CFR 200.302(b)(3), which require the financial management system of each non-Federal entity to provide for records that adequately identify the source and application of funds for federally funded activities.

Update the CPD Monitoring Handbook to incorporate the review of the PR 29 report when performing financial monitoring reviews.

Develop written procedures on how to review PR 29 report submissions and monitor resubmissions, late submissions, and nonsubmissions.

Evaluate and update IDIS to ensure that resubmissions of PR 29 reports are tracked and prior submissions are preserved and correct the system’s misclassification of unsubmitted and uncertified draft PR 29 reports as submitted.

Determine how often grantees’ requests for reimbursement contain cost outside the quarter and in coordination with OCFO, evaluate CPD’s grant accrual methodology and assumptions to ensure that it adequately considers the impact of these late cost reimbursements.

Develop guidance that encourages grantees to draw down funds for reimbursement on a regular schedule, not less than quarterly.

Work with OCFO to ensure that CPD collects and reports to OCFO all of the information needed to properly account for all CPD activities in HUD’s financial statements in accordance with Federal financial reporting requirements and accounting standards.

Update Line 4 - Cash (grant funds) disbursed during the reporting period in the PR 29 report to allow grantees to report all CDBG grant funds disbursed, including funds that have not yet been drawn down from HUD for reimbursement.

Obtain the required approvals under PRA for the PR 29 report.

We recommend that the Deputy Secretary Develop and execute a detailed plan and timeline for both testing and reporting estimates of improper payments in the PIH-TBRA and PBRA programs in compliance with Federal law and OMB guidance.

Status

In response to the Management Alert, the Deputy Secretary stated that she would provide a plan in 30 days. On April 10, 2024, the Chief Financial Officer, Assistant Secretary for Housing, and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing (PIH) stated their respective executives had been working together to develop a plan to accelerate HUD’s ability to produce statistically valid estimates. With respect to PBRA, HUD plans to use ongoing data collection for fiscal year (FY) 2023 tier 1 and tier 2 payments to develop a statistical estimate in FY 2024.

However, our ongoing Payment Integrity Information Act audit has determined that neither program produced a compliant estimate in fiscal year 2024. For multifamily-PBRA, HUD made some progress and reported an estimate that captured part of the payment cycle; however, the estimate did not include testing to ensure that housing assistance payments from contract administrators to owners were calculated correctly and supported by tenant-level documentation. The PIH-TBRA program did not produce an estimate at all, noting that IT system modernization must occur first. However, PIH has not yet provided a plan that indicates how the system upgrades will address this issue or a timeline for implementation. As of January 31, 2025, a detailed plan or timeline has not been provided.

Analysis

As of January 31, 2025, HUD has not provided a detailed plan or timeline for OIG review. It remains unclear how HUD will produce a complete estimate of the PBRA programs in future years, and when it will be able to produce an estimate for PIH-TBRA.

For HUD to close this recommendation, it must finish testing the full life cycle of payments in these programs and publicly report estimates of the improper payments in them. Merely producing a plan with future action target dates is not sufficient to meet the spirit of this recommendation.

PBRA and PIH-TBRA are the two largest program expenditures in HUD's portfolio, totaling $50 billion in FY 24, or 62.4 percent of HUD's total expenditures. HUD has been challenged with developing a compliant sampling methodology that can test the full payment cycle and that can be executed within the required timeframes. To fully address this recommendation, the sampling methodology should test the full payment cycle, and the associated sample testing and statistical estimation must be completed in time to be included in the Annual Financial Report.

Implementation of this recommendation will result in HUD better-safeguarding taxpayer dollars and decrease improper payments.

We recommend that the Director of Disaster Recovery collect and record the number of days that it or other entities take to complete each milestone in the grant process.

We recommend that the Director of Disaster Recovery establish timing benchmarks for the milestones at each significant step in the allocation and award process based on actual data accumulated for the various grants.

We recommend that the Director of Disaster Recovery take steps to ensure that the milestone point of allocation is formally defined and documented, to allow for accurate tracking of compliance with requirements.

We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary instruct PRDOH to implement a process to regularly conduct fraud risk assessments and determine a fraud risk profile. The fraud risk profile should include key findings and conclusions from the risk assessment, including the analysis of the types of fraud risks, their perceived likelihood and impact, risk tolerance, and the prioritization of risks.

We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary instruct PRDOH to improve fraud awareness initiatives, such as participating in organized antifraud conferences, reviewing the OIG’s Special Fraud Alerts, Bulletins, and Other Guidance, and attending fraud risk training tailored to the program’s fraud risk profile (including subrecipients).