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.
2017-KC-1003 | September 25, 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-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.
Closed on July 26, 2024 - 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.
Closed on January 24, 2024Require 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-EOpenClosedClosed on December 04, 2018
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-AOpenClosedClosed on January 12, 2018
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.
Closed on July 26, 2024Require 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-COpenClosedClosed on October 24, 2023
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-AOpenClosedClosed on January 12, 2018
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.
Closed on November 14, 2018Require 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-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-KC-0007 | September 11, 2017
HUD Subsidized 10,119 Units for Tenants Who Were Undercharged Flat Rents
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-KC-0007-001-AOpenClosed$6,324,625Funds 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 April 10, 2020Finalize and implement monitoring procedures to ensure that $6,324,625 in flat rents are appropriately charged to tenants over the next year.
- Status2017-KC-0007-001-BOpenClosedClosed on March 26, 2019
Follow up with the housing authorities in our sample, identified as noncompliant with flat rent requirements, to ensure that their rents are properly adjusted.
- Status2017-KC-0007-001-COpenClosedClosed on December 19, 2017
Clarify guidance to better enhance housing authority understanding of the requirement, including explaining that housing authorities must code ceiling rent tenants as flat rents and explaining what housing authorities should do when maximum rents for low-income housing tax credit properties are lower than the minimum flat rent amounts required by HUD.