Support or reimburse its program $93,651 from non-Federal funds for the missing required eligibility documentation.
2019-CH-1001 | December 20, 2018
The Housing Authority of the City of North Chicago, North Chicago, IL, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-CH-1001-002-AOpenClosed$93,651Questioned 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.
- Status2019-CH-1001-002-BOpenClosed$76Questioned 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 $76 from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate calculations of housing assistance.
- Status2019-CH-1001-002-COpenClosed$2,193Funds 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.
Reimburse the appropriate households $2,193 from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate calculations.
- Status2019-CH-1001-002-DOpenClosed$9,870Questioned 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 $9,870 ($7,663 $2,207) from non-Federal funds for the administrative fees it inappropriately earned for the missing required eligibility documentation and inappropriate calculations of housing assistance.
- Status2019-CH-1001-002-EOpenClosed
Implement adequate procedures and controls to ensure that the required documentation to support household eligibility is obtained and maintained and housing assistance payments are appropriately calculated.
- Status2019-CH-1001-002-FOpenClosed
Review the utility allowance schedules to ensure that all applicable utilities are provided to the households and that the utility allowances are based on the lower of the voucher size or unit size in accordance with HUD’s requirements.
2019-FO-0003 | November 15, 2018
Additional Details To Supplement Our Fiscal Years 2018 and 2017 (Restated) U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Financial Statement Audit
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-FO-0003-002-MOpenClosed
Design and implement a policy or procedure that ensures the accuracy of all information provided to HUD OCFO related to the PIH prepayment estimation methodology.
- Status2019-FO-0003-005-IOpenClosed$588,694Funds 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.
Deobligate all obligations marked for deobligation during the departmentwide OOR, including as much as $588,694 in 12 administrative obligations marked for deobligation as of September 30, 2018.
- Status2019-FO-0003-005-JOpenClosed$78,069Funds 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.
Review the three identified retained inactive obligations with remaining balances totaling $78,069 and close out and deobligate amounts tied to obligations that are no longer valid or needed.
Lead Hazard Control
- Status2019-FO-0003-005-OOpenClosed$60,395Funds 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.
Review the one identified retained inactive obligation with a remaining balance totaling $60,395 and deobligate amounts that are no longer valid or needed.
2018-CH-1010 | September 30, 2018
The City of Chicago’s Department of Public Health, Chicago, IL, Did Not Administer Its Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
Lead Hazard Control
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-AOpenClosed$387,443Questioned 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 grant administration services paid were cost reasonable or reimburse its Program $387,443 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-BOpenClosed$204,138Questioned 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 $102,069 from non-Federal funds for the duplicate payments made to its subcontractor for lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-COpenClosed$88,258Funds 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.
Coordinate with HUD’s Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes to determine whether $88,258 in Program funds ($77,597 $10,661) may be drawn down and used to reimburse its subcontractor if the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities are determined to be eligible.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-DOpenClosed
Determine whether the subcontractor is owed payment for 21 units, which the Department’s records showed were assisted under the Program but were not identified as assisted units according to documentation maintained by the Department to support its drawdowns from HUD’s LOCCS. If the Department determines that the subcontractor is owed payment for the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities, it should provide support that the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities were eligible and that the subcontractor was not reimbursed for these activities from non-Program funds. If these conditions have been met, the Department should reimburse the subcontractor from Program funds.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-EOpenClosed
Determine whether appropriate reimbursements were made to the subcontractor for the remaining 166 assisted units that were not a part of our review. If the Department determines that appropriate reimbursements were not made, it should provide support that the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities are Program eligible and the subcontractor was not reimbursed for these activities from non-Program funds. If these conditions have been met, the Department should reimburse the subcontractor from Program funds.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-FOpenClosed$119,766Questioned 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 the four households residing in assisted units were income eligible or reimburse its Program $59,883 from non-Federal funds for the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities completed in the assisted units.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-GOpenClosed$41,240Questioned 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 landlords gave preference in renting six vacant units to families with children under 6 years of age or reimburse its Program $41,240 from non-Federal funds for the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities completed at these assisted units.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-HOpenClosed$23,857Questioned 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 lead-based paint hazard control activities were necessary at 13 assisted units or reimburse its Program $23,857 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported lead-based paint hazard control activities completed at these assisted units.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-IOpenClosed$2,900Questioned 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 $2,900 from non-Federal funds for the two units in which the seven windows were not installed.
- Status2018-CH-1010-001-JOpenClosed$17,507Questioned 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.
Transfer $17,507 in non-Federal funds to its Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program and use the funds in accordance with the program grant requirements since these funds were not recaptured after the four assisted units were sold within 3 years.