Repay its project’s operating account for the ineligible $15,000 disbursement from non-project funds.
2017-DE-1003 | September 20, 2017
Baker Tower, Denver, CO, Incorrectly Disbursed Funds and Did Not Correctly Administer the Project’s Security Deposit Account
Housing
- Status2017-DE-1003-001-COpenClosed$15,000Questioned 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 January 10, 2018 - Status2017-DE-1003-002-AOpenClosedClosed on January 10, 2018
Perform an analysis of all security deposits and ensure that the security deposit account is fully funded.
- Status2017-DE-1003-002-BOpenClosedClosed on January 18, 2018
Implement controls to ensure existing procedures are followed to maintain the project’s security deposit funds separately from all other accounts by depositing and disbursing all security deposit funds directly into and from the security deposit account.
2017-BO-1007 | September 20, 2017
The Housing Authority of the City of Hartford, CT, Did Not Always Comply With Procurement Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-AOpenClosed$2,679,580Questioned 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 January 27, 2023Support that $2,533,377 in costs were reasonable and allowable program expenses in accordance with requirements or repay from non-Federal funds the appropriate programs any amounts they cannot support.
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-BOpenClosed$1,625,391Questioned 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 27, 2023Repay the appropriate programs from non-Federal funds the $1,524,604 in ineligible funds paid when costs exceeded contract terms.
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-COpenClosed$1,242,154Funds 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 November 13, 2018Determine the appropriateness of the remaining balance of $1,242,154 on unsupported contracts to ensure costs were reasonable, reprocure the subject contracts, or reallocate the funds to the appropriate program.
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-DOpenClosed$375,526Funds 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 December 07, 2018Reprocure expired service contracts to ensure estimated balances of $375,526 are used on eligible contract.
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-EOpenClosedClosed on December 12, 2018
Reprocure any service contracts necessary and ensure that the contracts are properly awarded in accordance with HUD requirements.
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-FOpenClosedClosed on September 28, 2018
Strengthen and implement controls and procedures over procurement, including monitoring consultants, to ensure that procurement activities meet HUD requirements.
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-GOpenClosedClosed on June 15, 2018
Establish and implement an effective system to ensure that payments do not exceed approved contract values.
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-HOpenClosedClosed on July 12, 2018
Establish and implement an effective system to maintain a complete and accurate contract register to ensure proper contract planning and administration.
- Status2017-BO-1007-001-IOpenClosedClosed on July 12, 2018
Provide technical assistance to the Authority to ensure that responsible staff and board members receive necessary procurement training.
2017-LA-1801 | September 19, 2017
Venta Financial Group, Inc., Las Vegas, NV, Improperly Originated FHA-Insured Loans With Restrictive Covenants
Housing
- Status2017-LA-1801-001-AOpenClosed$423,759Funds 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 March 06, 2019Work with HUD to nullify the restrictions on conveyance that violate HUD policy or indemnify HUD. This action will protect HUD against future losses of $418,277 for the eight loans.
- Status2017-LA-1801-001-BOpenClosed$5,482Questioned 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 January 03, 2018Repay HUD $5,482 for partial claims paid on two FHA loans that contained prohibited restrictive covenants.
- Status2017-LA-1801-001-COpenClosedClosed on February 27, 2019
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-1801-001-DOpenClosedClosed on February 27, 2019
Provide training to its employees regarding HUD’s requirements related to prohibited restrictions on conveyance.
2017-NY-1011 | September 19, 2017
MB Financial Bank, Rosemont, IL, Did Not Always Follow HUD’s Underwriting Requirements but Generally Complied With Quality Control Requirements
Housing
- Status2017-NY-1011-001-AOpenClosed$178,811Funds 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 September 20, 2017We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single Family Housing require MB Financial to indemnify HUD against potential losses of $178,811 for the four loans that did not comply with underwriting requirements (appendix C). HUD provided us copies of the four executed indemnification agreements in August and September 2017. Therefore, upon issuance of this report, we will enter a management decision into HUD’s Audit Resolution and Corrective Action Tracking System, along with copies of the indemnification agreements, and close this recommendation.
- Status2017-NY-1011-001-BOpenClosedClosed on January 08, 2018
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single Family Housing require MB Financial to provide training to its underwriters on HUD’s underwriting requirements for approving and rejecting loans.
- Status2017-NY-1011-001-COpenClosedClosed on January 08, 2018
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single Family Housing require MB Financial to update its policies and procedures to ensure that its staff understands underwriting requirements and the requirement that loans be manually underwritten when a refer decision is received from automated underwriting systems or when a loan is downgraded to a manual underwrite.
- Status2017-NY-1011-002-AOpenClosedClosed on January 08, 2018
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single Family Housing require MB Financial to update its quality control plan to include the specific procedures to be used when reviewing rejected loan applications.