Ensure that $1,045,085 in CDBG funds drawn from HUD between July 1, 2015, and October 31, 2018, can be traced to a level, which ensures that such funds have not been used in violation of the restrictions and prohibitions of applicable statutes, or reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds. Footnote 2: Total drawdowns of more than $1.5 million were adjusted to consider $106 questioned in recommendation 1D and $469,974 in recommendation 2A.
2019-AT-1005 | August 09, 2019
The Municipality of Yauco, PR, Did Not Always Administer Its CDBG Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-AT-1005-001-BOpenClosed$1,257,555Questioned 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.
2019-KC-0002 | June 25, 2019
HUD Paid Rental Subsidies To Benefit Public Housing and Voucher Tenants Reported as Excluded From Federal Programs or Deceased
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-KC-0002-001-AOpenClosed$13,669,007Funds 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.
Issue guidance to PHAs to ensure any applicant for or tenant of public or assisted housing whose name appears on the SAM excluded parties list are reviewed by PHAs to determine eligibility in a manner consistent with the regulations in 2 CFR 180 and 2424 so that ineligible applicants or tenants are not admitted or recertified to put up to $13.7 million to better use.
2019-AT-1004 | June 14, 2019
The North Carolina Department of Commerce Did Not Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Grants as Required by HUD
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-AOpenClosed$417,113Funds 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.
Put $417,113 in unspent NSP1 funds associated with three activities to better use by reprogramming the funds to other subrecipients using an appropriate method or return the funds to HUD.
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-BOpenClosed$1,300,000Questioned 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.
Support or reimburse its NSP1 grant $1,300,000 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported reallocation of grant funds.
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-DOpenClosed$1,186,105Questioned 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 or reimburse the appropriate NSP grant $1,186,105 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported subrecipient and administrative expenditures.
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-FOpenClosed
Update the NSP program income information in HUD’s grant tracking system and quarterly performance reports and reconcile with the Department’s records.
- Status2019-AT-1004-001-GOpenClosed
Establish and implement written procedures and provide adequate training to staff associated with administering the NSP grant to help ensure accurate reporting of program income.
2019-NY-1002 | May 29, 2019
The State of New York Did Not Ensure That Appraised Values Used by Its Program Were Supported and Appraisal Costs and Services Complied With Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-NY-1002-001-AOpenClosed$5,920,097Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to provide documentation to support the appraised fair market values of the 14 properties sampled to ensure that $5,920,097 in settlement costs was supported. This recommendation includes but is not limited to providing support to show that appraisals contained accurate and verified information for the subject and comparable properties, time adjustments were supported, and other adjustments were supported. If support cannot be provided, the State should reimburse the unsupported costs from non-Federal funds.
- Status2019-NY-1002-001-BOpenClosed$361,465,173Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to provide documentation to support the appraised fair market values of the 942 other properties included in our sampling universe to ensure that $361,465,173 in settlement costs was supported. This recommendation includes but is not limited to providing support to show that appraisals contained accurate and verified information for the subject and comparable properties, time adjustments were supported, and other adjustments were supported. If support cannot be provided, the State should reimburse the unsupported costs from non-Federal funds.
- Status2019-NY-1002-001-DOpenClosed$93,350,616Funds 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to strengthen controls over the property valuation process for its program to ensure that up to $93,350,616 not yet disbursed is put to better use. This recommendation includes but is not limited to implementing a process to review the appraisal and quality control work to ensure that appraised fair market values are supported and that quality control reviews are performed as required by Federal, State, and industry standards and to take appropriate action for cases in which the work does not comply with requirements.
- Status2019-NY-1002-002-AOpenClosed$3,119,209Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to provide documentation to show that $3,119,209 paid for appraisals and poststorm addenda performed by its contractor was reasonable, supported, and for services that were performed in accordance with applicable requirements or reimburse any unsupported costs from non-Federal funds.
- Status2019-NY-1002-002-BOpenClosed$156,940Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to provide documentation to show that $156,940 paid for sales brochures, economic land analysis studies, and consultant fees was reasonable, necessary, supported, and for services that were performed in accordance with applicable requirements or reimburse any unsupported costs from non-Federal funds.
2019-KC-0001 | April 11, 2019
FHA Improperly Paid Partial Claims That Did Not Reinstate Their Related Loans
Housing
- Status2019-KC-0001-001-BOpenClosed$27,100,000Funds 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.
Design controls to protect the insurance fund from improper partial claims that did not reinstate the loans to put $27.1 million to better use.
2018-OE-0003 | October 31, 2018
HUD Fiscal Year 2018 Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) Evaluation Report
Chief Information Officer
- Status2018-OE-0003-12OpenClosedSensitiveSensitive
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.
2018-NY-1007 | September 26, 2018
The City of New York, NY, Did Not Always Use Disaster Recovery Funds Under Its Program for Eligible and Supported Costs
Community Planning and Development
- Status2018-NY-1007-001-AOpenClosed$594,012Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the City to provide documentation to show that the $594,012 disbursed due to the use of multipliers was for eligible, reasonable, necessary, and supported costs or reimburse its program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-NY-1007-001-COpenClosed$1,198Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the City to reimburse its program $1,198 from non-Federal funds for overpaid wages due to billing and payroll errors.
- Status2018-NY-1007-001-DOpenClosed$544Funds 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the City to pay $544 in unpaid wages to the subcontractors of the affected employees and submit evidence that these employees have been paid.
- Status2018-NY-1007-001-GOpenClosed
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the City to provide documentation showing that payments made under the Rockaway Boardwalk construction management services contract complied with Davis-Bacon and Related Acts requirements and that restitution is made to affected workers for any underpayments identified.
2018-LA-0007 | September 26, 2018
HUD Paid an Estimated $413 Million for Unnecessary Preforeclosure Claim Interest and Other Costs Due to Lender Servicing Delays
Housing
- Status2018-LA-0007-001-AOpenClosed$413,513,975Funds 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.
PriorityPriorityWe believe these open recommendations, if implemented, will have the greatest impact on helping HUD achieve its mission to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all.
Implement a change to regulations at 24 CFR Part 203 to require curtailment of preforeclosure interest and other costs that are caused by lender servicing delays, resulting in $413,513,975 in funds to be put to better use. This should include updating or seeking statutory authority to update HUD’s regulations as necessary and coordinating with HUD’s Office of Finance and Budget, well before any changes go through departmental clearance, to ensure that planned curtailment requirements can be consistently enforced through the claims process.
2018-NY-1005 | September 25, 2018
The Red Bank Housing Authority, Red Bank, NJ, Did Not Always Administer Its Operating and Capital Funds in Accordance With Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2018-NY-1005-001-AOpenClosed$252,000Questioned 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.
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Newark Office of Public Housing require the Authority to provide documentation to show that the $252,000 paid to the Long Branch Housing Authority was for eligible, reasonable, necessary, and allocable costs or reimburse its Operating and Capital Fund programs from non-Federal funds for any amount that it cannot support or that is not considered reasonable.