Require the Englewood Apartments’ owner to repay HUD from non-project funds the projected $377,108 in housing assistance payments for tenants who were not eligible for assistance.
2020-KC-1001 | June 08, 2020
Englewood Apartments Did Not Comply With Tenant Eligibility and Recertification Requirements
Housing
- Status2020-KC-1001-001-AOpenClosed$377,108Questioned 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.
- Status2020-KC-1001-001-BOpenClosed$24,295Questioned 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.
Require Englewood Apartments to support that $24,295 in unsupported housing assistance payments was eligible and accurate. Englewood Apartments’ owner should repay any subsidy overpayments to HUD from non-project sources. Further, the owner should reimburse tenants for overcharged rents or enter into a repayment agreement with tenants who were undercharged due to nondisclosure of income.
- Status2020-KC-1001-001-COpenClosed
Require the Englewood Apartments’ owner to implement appropriate controls, including a formalized process, to use when conducting initial certifications and interim and annual recertifications to ensure that tenants are eligible, housing assistance payments are accurate, and tenant files contain all required documentation to comply with HUD’s and its own requirements. In addition, the updated controls should ensure a layer of management oversight to review all certifications before final approval until such time as onsite management is trained and has been proven to follow HUD’s and its own requirements.
- Status2020-KC-1001-001-DOpenClosed
Ensure that the owner, management agent, and staff complete training to ensure that they understand their duties, including HUD’s and local tenant eligibility and certification requirements.
- Status2020-KC-1001-001-EOpenClosed
Monitor Englewood Apartments to ensure that its staff properly maintains tenant files and completes required certifications in accordance with HUD’s and its own requirements.
- Status2020-KC-1001-001-FOpenClosed
Ensure that Englewood Apartments’ owner and its identity-of-interest management agent provide necessary oversight to its onsite staff.
- Status2020-KC-1001-002-AOpenClosed
Require Englewood Apartments’ owner to further develop a formalized process to use when running and reviewing EIV reports.
- Status2020-KC-1001-002-BOpenClosed
Require Englewood Apartments’ owner to ensure that the management agent and staff complete EIV training to ensure that staff members understand their duties and both HUD’s and Englewood Apartments’ own requirements.
- Status2020-KC-1001-002-COpenClosed
Monitor Englewood Apartments to ensure that it properly runs and reviews the EIV reports.
- Status2020-KC-1001-002-DOpenClosed
Ensure that Englewood Apartments’ owner and its identity-of-interest management agent provide necessary oversight to its onsite staff.
2020-PH-1001 | April 20, 2020
The Philadelphia Housing Authority, Philadelphia, PA, Did Not Comply With Procurement and Conflict-of-Interest Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2020-PH-1001-001-AOpenClosed$860,132Questioned 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 show that the proposal of the vendor that it selected and paid $860,132 was the most advantageous or reimburse its program from non-Federal funds for any amounts that it cannot support.
- Status2020-PH-1001-001-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement controls to monitor its agent to ensure that it procures products and services in accordance with applicable Federal procurement requirements.
- Status2020-PH-1001-001-COpenClosed$156,675Questioned 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.
Reimburse its program $156,675 from non-Federal funds for the ineligible payments it made due to the conflict-of-interest situation identified by the audit.
- Status2020-PH-1001-001-DOpenClosed
Develop and implement controls to ensure that it obtains waivers from HUD before entering into agreements that create conflict-of-interest situations.
- Status2020-PH-1001-001-EOpenClosed
Provide training and technical assistance to the Authority to ensure that it understands the proper use of intergovernmental agreements in accordance with HUD requirements.
2020-CH-0002 | March 20, 2020
HUD May Be Able To Improve Its Cash Flow Model To Estimate and Reestimate the Credit Subsidy for Cohorts of Mortgages Within the Section 232 Program
Housing
- Status2020-CH-0002-001-AOpenClosed
Continue testing the financial and credit history variables, including default data, and include the appropriate reliable and sufficient variables for the cash flow model used to estimate and reestimate the credit subsidy for the cohorts of mortgages within the Section 232 program.
2020-BO-1002 | March 19, 2020
The Housing Authority of the City of Springfield, MA, Did Not Always Comply With Procurement and Contract Administration Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-AOpenClosed$916,132Questioned 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 $916,132 spent on contracts was fair and reasonable in accordance with Federal requirements or repay the Operating Fund or Capital Fund program from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported.
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-BOpenClosed$408,968Funds 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.
Support that $408,968 in funds not yet spent on contracts would be fair and reasonable or reallocate the funds to ensure that they will be put to their intended use.
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-COpenClosed
Reprocure any contracts for which cost reasonableness cannot be supported and contracts were not properly awarded to ensure compliance with HUD requirements.
- Status2020-BO-1002-001-DOpenClosed
Ensure that all Authority staff members working with procurements and contract administration receive Federal procurement training.