We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Baltimore Office of Public Housing direct the Authority to develop and implement controls to ensure that it administers its waiting list according to the requirements in its administrative plan, including maintaining documentation to show that it properly selected applicants from the waiting list.
2019-PH-1004 | August 14, 2019
The Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, MD, Did Not Always Properly Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
Public and Indian Housing
2019-PH-1004-001-B
Closed on June 12, 20222019-PH-1004-001-C
Closed on June 14, 2022We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Baltimore Office of Public Housing direct the Authority to develop and implement procedures to ensure that it maintains documentation to show that it admitted eligible families into the program.
2019-PH-1004-001-D
Closed on August 11, 2020We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Baltimore Office of Public Housing direct the Authority to update its administrative plan to establish the timeframe during which an applicant must not have engaged in criminal activity before it will admit the applicant into the program.
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
2019-AT-1005-001-A
Develop and implement a financial management system in accordance with HUD requirements, including but not limited to permitting the disbursement of funds in a timely manner.
2019-AT-1005-001-B
$1,045,085Questioned CostsRecommendations 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.
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-1005-001-C
$1,641Funds Put to Better UseRecommendations 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.
Require the Municipality to return to its line of credit and put to better use $1,641 associated with the unspent program funds that have been carried over since December 2017.
2019-AT-1005-001-D
Closed on July 17, 2020$106Questioned CostsRecommendations 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 the CDBG program from non-Federal funds the $106 paid for ineligible bank penalties.
2019-AT-1005-001-E
Establish and implement adequate controls and procedures to permit proper accountability for all CDBG funds to ensure that they are used solely for authorized purposes and properly safeguarded.
2019-AT-1005-002-A
$469,974Questioned CostsRecommendations 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.
Submit supporting documentation showing how $469,974 in CDBG funds disbursed for street improvements was properly used and in accordance with HUD requirements or reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds.
2019-AT-1005-002-B
Determine the amount spent for the resurfacing of the 16 private properties identified and reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds.
2019-AT-1005-002-C
Establish and implement adequate policies and procedures, including project inspection protocols, to ensure that CDBG funds are used for activities that meet a national objective, are used for eligible purposes, and are properly supported.
2019-BO-1003 | August 05, 2019
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Did Not Always Ensure That Its Grantees Complied With Applicable State and Federal Laws and Requirements
Community Planning and Development
2019-BO-1003-001-A
Closed on March 23, 2022$665,920Questioned CostsRecommendations 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 from non-Federal funds the $665,920 in ineligible costs charged to the program
2019-BO-1003-001-B
Closed on December 03, 2019$494,517Questioned CostsRecommendations 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 14 projects, with $494,517 in construction costs, met the environmental review requirements and repay from non-Federal funds any amounts attributed to projects that cannot be certified.
2019-BO-1003-001-C
Closed on February 16, 2021Provide additional guidance to their grantees and strengthen controls to ensure that tier two environmental reviews are performed and properly conducted and signed by the responsible entity before committing program funds.
2019-BO-1003-001-D
Closed on December 03, 2019$401,870Questioned CostsRecommendations 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 $401,870 for contracts that were awarded without an independent cost estimate or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported.
2019-BO-1003-001-E
Closed on February 16, 2021Provide additional guidance to their grantees and strengthen controls over procurement to ensure that grantees follow applicable State and Federal procurement requirements, including obtaining independent cost estimates and ensuring full and open competition.
2019-BO-1003-001-F
Closed on February 16, 2021Define which expenses should be considered program delivery costs and strengthen controls over program costs to ensure that costs are properly charged.
2019-PH-1003 | August 02, 2019
PK Management, LLC, Richmond Heights, OH, Did Not Always Maintain Documentation Required to Support Housing Assistance Payments
Housing
2019-PH-1003-001-A
Closed on October 26, 2022$497,762Questioned CostsRecommendations 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 housing assistance payments the projects received totaling $497,762 or reimburse HUD from nonproject funds for any amount that it cannot support.
2019-PH-1003-001-B
Closed on April 06, 2022Implement controls to ensure that it maintains adequate documentation in the tenant files to show that tenants were eligible for assistance and that the housing assistance payments were supported.
2019-NY-1003 | August 02, 2019
New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, New York, NY, Did Not Always Ensure That Units Met Housing Quality Standards but Generally Abated Payments When Required
Public and Indian Housing
2019-NY-1003-001-A
Closed on January 10, 2022We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New York Office of Public and Indian Housing require HPD to certify, along with the owners of the 52 units cited in the finding, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected.