We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Albuquerque Office of Community Planning and Development require the City of Albuquerque’s Department of Family and Community Services to develop and implement written CDBG policies and procedures, which detail the requirements, including but not limited to (1) meeting Federal procurement requirements, (2) executing written agreements for all subrecipients and contractors that meet minimum requirements, (3) documenting all conflicts of interest, (4) complying with HUD environmental review requirements, (5) maintaining documentation to support that its CDBG-funded projects met one or more national objectives, (6) properly and accurately monitoring subrecipients for compliance with all requirements, and (7) consistently and accurately reporting activities in IDIS.
2017-FW-1010 | August 15, 2017
The City of Albuquerque, NM, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program in Accordance With Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-FW-1010-004-FOpenClosedClosed on September 13, 2018
- Status2017-FW-1010-004-GOpenClosedClosed on March 22, 2019
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Albuquerque Office of Community Planning and Development continue to classify the City of Albuquerque as a high risk grantee until such time as HUD has determined the City has implemented an effective program in compliance with all requirements.
2017-PH-1005 | August 13, 2017
The State of New Jersey Did Not Always Disburse Disaster Funds for Its Sandy Homebuyer Assistance Program To Assist Eligible Home Buyers
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-PH-1005-001-AOpenClosed$987,500Questioned 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.
Closed on March 05, 2021Repay HUD from non-Federal funds for the $987,500 disbursed to 21 home buyers who did not meet all of the program eligibility requirements.
2017-LA-1006 | August 08, 2017
The City of Fresno, CA, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-AOpenClosed$6,529,501Questioned 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.
Closed on September 27, 2022Support the eligibility of $6,529,500 in code enforcement costs, including meeting code enforcement requirements, preparing time distribution reports, and supporting vehicle costs, or repay the program from non-Federal funds (appendix D).
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-BOpenClosedClosed on May 21, 2018
Suspend funding to its code enforcement program until it can show that it has implemented controls, addressed its capacity issues, and understands and abides by HUD requirements.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-COpenClosed$4,565Questioned 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.
Closed on June 29, 2018Repay the program $4,565 from non-Federal funds for ineligible code enforcement program costs.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-DOpenClosed$139,071Questioned 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.
Closed on August 02, 2018Repay the program $139,071 from non-Federal funds for ineligible tire team code enforcement program costs.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-EOpenClosed$19,919Questioned 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.
Closed on October 02, 2018Repay the program $19,919 from non-Federal funds for ineligible antigraffiti program salary costs.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-FOpenClosed$1,107,000Questioned 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.
Closed on December 06, 2018Support the eligibility of the $1,107,000 in after school program costs, including meeting the limited clientele national objective, or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-GOpenClosed$218,028Questioned 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.
Closed on October 02, 2018Support the eligibility of the $218,028 in antigraffiti costs or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-HOpenClosed$55,000Questioned 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.
Closed on June 04, 2019Support the eligibility of the $55,000 subrecipient drawdown or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-IOpenClosed$428,373Funds 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.
Closed on October 02, 2018Develop and implement written code enforcement policies and procedures to meet CDBG requirements or amend the funding for another CDBG-eligible project. Improving code enforcement controls will result in $428,373 in funds to be put to better use.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-JOpenClosedClosed on June 29, 2018
Execute contractual agreements with each CDBG recipient department to ensure compliance with all Federal guidelines.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-KOpenClosedClosed on August 02, 2018
Develop and implement written policies and procedures for specific departments, update and implement CDBG-specific written policies and procedures, and provide formal training and technical assistance to the Development and Resource Management Department employees to ensure that they understand and follow CDBG requirements.
- Status2017-LA-1006-001-LOpenClosedClosed on August 02, 2018
Develop and implement a monitoring program within the City’s Development and Resource Management Department to ensure that it periodically monitors and provides guidance to its subrecipient(s) and City departments on how to administer CDBG funds.
2017-AT-1008 | July 20, 2017
The City of Birmingham, AL, Did Not Ensure That Adequate Policies and Procedures Were Implemented for Its Internal Audits and Procurement Process
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-AT-1008-001-AOpenClosedClosed on November 02, 2017
Develop and implement HUD-approved policies and procedures to ensure that the process for conducting an internal audit complies with HUD regulations and the policies and procedures are submitted and certified to HUD.
- Status2017-AT-1008-001-BOpenClosedClosed on November 02, 2017
Immediately conduct an internal audit of the CDBG-DR grant funds.
- Status2017-AT-1008-001-COpenClosedClosed on November 02, 2017
Update, finalize, and implement its procurement policies to comply with 2 CFR 200.317-326.
2017-AT-1009 | July 20, 2017
Louisville Metro, Louisville, KY, Did Not Always Administer Its HOPWA Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2017-AT-1009-001-AOpenClosed$31,157Questioned 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.
Closed on July 11, 2018Adequately support or reimburse its HOPWA program $31,157 from non-Federal funds for the inappropriate disbursements.
- Status2017-AT-1009-001-BOpenClosed$14,017Questioned 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.
Closed on July 11, 2018Reimburse its HOPWA program $14,017 from non-Federal funds for the inappropriate disbursements.