The OIG has determined that the contents of this recommendation would not be appropriate for public disclosure and has therefore limited its distribution to selected officials.
2017-DP-0003 | September 28, 2017
New Core Project: Although Transaction Processing Had Improved Weaknesses Remained
Chief Financial Officer
- Status2017-DP-0003-001-DOpenClosedSensitiveSensitive
Sensitive information refers to information that could have a damaging import if released to the public and, therefore, must be restricted from public disclosure.
- Status2017-DP-0003-001-EOpenClosedSensitiveSensitive
Sensitive information refers to information that could have a damaging import if released to the public and, therefore, must be restricted from public disclosure.
The OIG has determined that the contents of this recommendation would not be appropriate for public disclosure and has therefore limited its distribution to selected officials.
- Status2017-DP-0003-001-FOpenClosedSensitiveSensitive
Sensitive information refers to information that could have a damaging import if released to the public and, therefore, must be restricted from public disclosure.
The OIG has determined that the contents of this recommendation would not be appropriate for public disclosure and has therefore limited its distribution to selected officials.
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-KC-0009 | September 26, 2017
Some HUD Employees Used Travel Cards for Potentially Improper Purchases and Purchase Cards Without All Required Approvals
Chief Financial Officer
- Status2017-KC-0009-001-AOpenClosed
Develop and implement adequate written policies to ensure that cardholders obtain appropriate authorizations to support charges to their government travel cards and establish a process for submitting a written request to OCFO for a merchant code unblock.
- Status2017-KC-0009-001-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement written policies to ensure that program offices adequately follow up on identified questionable charges and inform OCFO of significant travel card violations when they are identified.
- Status2017-KC-0009-001-COpenClosed$555,337Questioned 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.
Review the identified 3,160 transactions totaling $555,337 to determine whether they were for official government travel. If they were not for official travel, OCFO should determine whether the cardholders paid the credit bill for the improper charges, request reimbursement when applicable, and take all other appropriate actions.
2017-BO-1007 | September 21, 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.
Support 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.
Repay 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.
Determine 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.
Reprocure expired service contracts to ensure estimated balances of $375,526 are used on eligible contract.