Ensure that the quality controls over the calculation of housing assistance payments implemented by the Commission are sufficient.
2018-CH-1001 | June 11, 2018
The Grand Rapids Housing Commission, Grand Rapids, MI, Did Not Always Correctly Calculate and Pay Housing Assistance for Units Converted Under the Rental Assistance Demonstration
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-JOpenClosed
2018-LA-0002 | May 07, 2018
HUD Did Not Have Adequate Controls To Ensure That Grantees Submitted Accurate Tribal Enrollment Numbers for Program Funding
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2018-LA-0002-001-AOpenClosed
Update the program’s information reporting requirements on form HUD-4117 to ensure that grantees report tribal enrollment numbers annually regardless of whether there are changes or corrections.
- Status2018-LA-0002-001-BOpenClosed
Revise form HUD-4117 to include certification and false claim statements that hold grantees responsible for reporting accurate tribal enrollment numbers to HUD annually.
- Status2018-LA-0002-001-COpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to assist in formal challenging of grantees’ reporting tribal enrollment numbers in accordance with applicable requirements.
- Status2018-LA-0002-001-DOpenClosed
Issue guidance to grantees on procedures to ensure accurate reporting of tribal enrollment numbers.
2018-SE-1001 | April 24, 2018
The Spokane, WA, Housing Authority Did Not Follow Permanent Relocation Requirements for Its RAD Conversion of the Parsons Apartments
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2018-SE-1001-001-AOpenClosed
Require the Authority to design and implement controls to ensure that employees comply with RAD relocation requirements and that its RAD conversion plans submitted to HUD accurately address any tenant relocations.
- Status2018-SE-1001-001-BOpenClosed
Monitor the Authority to ensure that it does not improperly relocate tenants during its planned conversion of the remaining public housing units.
- Status2018-SE-1001-001-COpenClosed
Conduct a compliance review of relocation and pursue corrective action as necessary on behalf of the permanently relocated tenants.
2018-KC-1002 | April 06, 2018
The Kansas City, MO, Health Department Did Not Spend Lead Based Paint Hazard Control Grant Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Lead Hazard Control
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-AOpenClosed$19,473Questioned 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 U.S. Treasury $19,173 spent on ineligible assistance from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-BOpenClosed$10,731Questioned 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.
Complete a cost breakdown to support the $10,731 spent on a rental property, which included assistance to an ineligible unit, and repay the ineligible assistance to the U.S. Treasury from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-COpenClosed$1,803,705Questioned 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.
Recalculate annual income for participants assisted with the 2014 lead hazard control grant to support the $1,803,705 spent. For any assistance the Health Department cannot support with complete income calculations, it should repay the U.S. Treasury from non-Federal funds, less any amount repaid as a result of recommendations 1B and 2A.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-DOpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures that clarify the definition of annual income to be used, calculation components, and the documentation required to calculate income.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-EOpenClosed
Develop and implement procedures for quality control reviews to ensure that annual income is properly calculated.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-FOpenClosed
Provide training on HUD’s income requirements to employees responsible for calculating income.
- Status2018-KC-1002-002-AOpenClosed$79,738Questioned 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.
Provide support showing the $79,738 spent on window replacement qualified or repay the U.S. Treasury from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-KC-1002-002-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that all windows replaced meet lead hazard qualifications.
- Status2018-KC-1002-002-COpenClosed
Develop and implement quality control procedures to ensure that all bid specifications are reviewed for qualified items based on the risk assessment results.
- Status2018-KC-1002-003-AOpenClosed
Update the Health Department’s work plan to include policies and procedures for defining, determining, and documenting relocation hardship for all participants.
- Status2018-KC-1002-004-AOpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that the property owners receive the required information concerning lead-based paint disclosure requirements, risk assessment results, summaries of treatments and clearances, and ongoing maintenance activities, including how to report paint deterioration.
2018-PH-1003 | March 30, 2018
The Crisfield Housing Authority, Crisfield, MD, Did Not Properly Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2018-PH-1003-001-AOpenClosed$561,122Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to support $280,561 (housing assistance and utility allowance payments totaling $237,809 for families that did not meet eligibility requirements and $42,752 in administrative fees) or reimburse its program from non-Federal funds for any amounts it cannot support.