Provide adequate training to staff on the appropriate classification of disaster recovery activities to ensure costs are accurately allocated and recorded.
2018-AT-1010 | September 21, 2018
The Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, Tallahassee, FL, Should Strengthen Its Capacity To Administer Its Disaster Grants
Community Planning and Development
- Status2018-AT-1010-001-COpenClosed
- Status2018-AT-1010-001-DOpenClosed
Continue to establish a data sharing agreement with FEMA for Hurricanes Hermine and Matthew to ensure that all sources of funding are included in its disaster policies and procedures to prevent duplication of benefits and ensure that the term of the agreement is sufficient.
- Status2018-AT-1010-001-EOpenClosed
Continue to negotiate with SBA to extend its data-sharing agreements for the term of the expenditure requirements set forth in public laws or the Federal Register.
- Status2018-AT-1010-001-FOpenClosed
Continue to fill its vacancy and assess staffing resources as it prepares for additional disaster funds.
2018-BO-1005 | September 19, 2018
The State of Connecticut Did Not Ensure That Its Grantees Properly Administered Their Housing Rehabilitation Programs
Community Planning and Development
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-AOpenClosed$1,190,977Questioned 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 from non-Federal funds the $1,190,977 in ineligible costs charged to the program.
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-BOpenClosed$434,970Questioned 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 from non-Federal funds the $434,970 in unreasonable costs charged to the program
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-COpenClosed$249,015Questioned 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 $249,015 in program costs spent on a 2014 grant for which the grantee was unable to provide a tier one environmental review record or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-DOpenClosed$676,922Questioned 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 $676,922 for contracts that were improperly procured or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported.
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-EOpenClosed$422,600Questioned 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 $422,600 in program income that was not used before additional grant fund drawdowns or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-FOpenClosed
Strengthen controls over program oversight to ensure that grantees comply with their agreements and program requirements, including tier two environmental reviews, contract procurements, and homeowner and project eligibility, to ensure that (1) all income, including rental income, is considered; (2) loan-to-value ratios do not exceed 90 percent without State approval; and (3) projects do not exceed the program limits without State approval.
- Status2018-BO-1005-001-GOpenClosed
Strengthen controls over monitoring to ensure that onsite monitoring and monitoring letters are completed in a timely manner and sufficient supporting documentation is required and reviewed by those responsible for grant oversight.
- Status2018-BO-1005-002-AOpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to assess the validity of all program complaints to ensure that they are addressed and resolved in a timely manner.
- Status2018-BO-1005-002-BOpenClosed
Provide additional guidance to its grantees regarding its policy stating that the repair or replacement of paved surfaces should be minimal in cost and incidental to the rehabilitation of the dwelling, including whether grantees are required to consult with the State before starting the work.
2018-LA-1006 | July 25, 2018
The Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, Sacramento, CA, Did Not Always Use Community Development Block Grant Funds in Accordance with HUD Requirements or Its Own Policies
Community Planning and Development
- Status2018-LA-1006-001-AOpenClosed$272,569Questioned 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 that the 59 contracts awarded for the emergency repair program were fair and reasonable or repay its program $272,569 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1006-001-BOpenClosed
Obtain technical assistance from HUD to revise its Emergency Repair Program to meet CDBG requirements.
- Status2018-LA-1006-001-COpenClosed$50,000Questioned 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.
Support that the contract awarded for the food incubator study was fair and reasonable and met a final cost objective or repay its program $50,000 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1006-001-DOpenClosed$48,895Questioned 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 that change orders executed outside the scope of the Colonial Heights Library contract were fair and reasonable or repay its program $48,895 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1006-001-EOpenClosed$13,950Questioned 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 that the contract awarded for the Boys and Girls Club feasibility study was fair and reasonable and met a final cost objective or repay its program $13,950 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1006-001-FOpenClosed
Provide procurement training to its staff members who work on CDBG program activities and ensure that staff members comply with HUD requirements and use its current procurement policy.
- Status2018-LA-1006-001-GOpenClosed$55,200Questioned 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 that the entrepreneur center feasibility study met a final cost objective or repay its program $55,200 from non-Federal funds.