We recommend that HUD require the City to develop and submit to HUD for approval an updated planning and administration budget and staffing plan, after reassessing the infrastructure projects in recommendation 1A, to complete the National Disaster Resilience projects with the funds and within the timeframe remaining.

We recommend that HUD require the City to analyze the method used to charge planning and administration costs to ensure that all costs are applied to the correct costs category and are valid charges to the National Disaster Resilience grant.

We recommend that HUD require the City to review misallocated planning and administration funds and reallocate any mistakenly allocated funds to the correct National Disaster Resilience project or grant activity. This measure could make available additional funds for program oversight.

We recommend that HUD require the City to develop a plan for how the City will continue to fulfill the required monitoring and oversight responsibilities of the National Disaster Resilience programs and projects if it runs out of planning and administration funds before it completes these programs and projects.

We recommend that HUD require the City to provide monitoring reports and supporting documentation to show that it conducted periodic monitoring of NORA’ s performance and compliance with program rules and regulations and ensured that NORA promptly remedies any findings or concerns. This includes, but is not limited to, ensuring that NORA (1) provides adequate oversight of the contractors providing service under the program and (2) maintains documentation to support eligibility for program participants.

We recommend that HUD require the City to develop and implement a methodology for NORA to conduct periodic evaluations at appropriate points during the construction process to assess the quality of the work on all new properties and correct any issues identified.

We recommend that HUD require the City to develop and implement a plan for how to review the condition of the property updates and determine where repairs are needed.

We recommend that HUD require the City to analyze the effectiveness of the Retrofit program and identify what improvements are needed to better benefit program participants and lessen their burden, to include obtaining input from program participants, and implement those improvements.

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

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.