Reimburse its program $46,605 from non-Federal funds ($44,214 for housing assistance payments and $2,391 in associated administrative fees) for the 22 units that materially failed to meet HUD’s housing quality standards.
2017-PH-1007 | September 28, 2017
The Chester Housing Authority, Chester, PA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-PH-1007-001-BOpenClosed$46,605Questioned 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.
- Status2017-PH-1007-001-COpenClosed$2,668,680Funds 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.
Develop and implement procedures and controls to monitor the inspection process to ensure that program units meet housing quality standards, thereby ensuring that an estimated $2,668,680 in program funds is spent for units that are decent, safe, and sanitary.
2017-KC-1003 | September 26, 2017
Majestic Management, LLC, St. Louis, MO, a Management Agent for the East St. Louis Housing Authority, Mismanaged Its Public Housing Program
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-AOpenClosed
Require the Authority to require Majestic Management to develop and implement a process to ensure that it makes any needed adjustments to employee payroll and transfers accurate amounts from the project accounts for payroll.
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-BOpenClosed
Require the Authority to require Majestic Management to design and implement a process to ensure that actual staff hours are accurately tracked and only dedicated employees are paid from project funds.
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-COpenClosed$1,136,046Questioned 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 the Authority and Majestic Management to support $568,023 spent on payroll allocated to the projects or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-DOpenClosed$219,330Questioned 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 the Authority and Majestic Management to reimburse from non-Federal funds the $109,665 in ineligible expenses that Majestic Management charged to the projects.
- Status2017-KC-1003-001-EOpenClosed
Require the Authority and Majestic Management to repay any excessive annual leave that Majestic Management paid to its employees from project funds when its contract terminated in 2017.
- Status2017-KC-1003-002-AOpenClosed
Require the Authority to provide training on procurement requirements in public housing to all Majestic Management employees working at the projects.
- Status2017-KC-1003-002-BOpenClosed$974,844Questioned 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 the Authority and Majestic Management to support that the $487,422 spent on goods and services for the projects was a reasonable cost and the goods and services were procured from eligible vendors or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-KC-1003-002-COpenClosed
Require the Authority to review all other payments to the sampled vendors to confirm that the costs were reasonable and the goods and services were procured from eligible vendors or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-KC-1003-003-AOpenClosed
Require the Authority to monitor Majestic Management to ensure that the recent training was effective and the new checklist is in use and effective.
- Status2017-KC-1003-003-BOpenClosed$152Questioned 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 the Authority to recompute the rents for the households noted above and as necessary for errors made by Majestic Management, reimburse tenants for overcharged rent from operating funds or rent credit, and enter into repayment agreements with tenants if they were undercharged based on nondisclosure of income.
2017-PH-1006 | September 25, 2017
The Owner of Schwenckfeld Manor, Lansdale, PA, Did Not Always Manage Its HUD-Insured Property in Accordance With Applicable HUD Requirements
Housing
- Status2017-PH-1006-001-DOpenClosed
Provide training and technical assistance to the owner and its management agent to ensure compliance with the terms of its regulatory agreement and applicable HUD requirements.
- Status2017-PH-1006-002-AOpenClosed
Submit a project owner’s or management agent’s certification for identity-of-interest agents, a management entity profile, a management plan, and other required documentation for review and approval.
- Status2017-PH-1006-002-BOpenClosed$402,975Questioned 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.
Request retroactive approval of the fees paid to the identity-of-interest entity totaling $402,975 and any fees incurred outside our audit period, including fiscal year 2017, when submitting the project owner’s or management agent’s certification for identity-of-interest agents in response to recommendation 2A. If the request is not approved retroactively, the owner should repay the project from nonproject funds for the amount that was not approved.
- Status2017-PH-1006-002-COpenClosed
Evaluate the owner’s capability to effectively manage the project and consider whether independent professional management services are needed.
2017-LA-1802 | September 22, 2017
SecurityNational Mortgage Company, Las Vegas, NV, Improperly Originated FHA Loans for Properties With Restrictive Covenants
Housing
- Status2017-LA-1802-001-AOpenClosed$408,295Funds 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.
Work with HUD to nullify the restrictions on conveyance that violate HUD policy or indemnify HUD. This action will protect HUD against future losses of $381,823 for the seven loans.
- Status2017-LA-1802-001-BOpenClosed$26,472Questioned 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 HUD $26,472 for partial claims paid on one FHA loan that contained prohibited restrictive covenants.
- Status2017-LA-1802-001-COpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to identify prohibited restrictions on conveyance to ensure that it does not originate FHA loans with prohibited restrictive covenants.
- Status2017-LA-1802-001-DOpenClosed
Provide training to its employees regarding HUD’s requirements related to prohibited restrictions on conveyance.