Pursue collection from the applicable projects or reimburse its program $5,065 from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance.
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
2018-CH-1001-001-E
Closed on September 06, 2018$5,065Questioned 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.
2018-CH-1001-001-F
Closed on March 11, 2019$177Funds 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.
Reimburse the appropriate projects $177 from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance.
2018-CH-1001-001-G
Closed on March 11, 2019$263Funds 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.
Reimburse the appropriate households $263 from program funds for the underpayment of utility allowance reimbursements.
2018-CH-1001-001-H
Closed on September 30, 2020Review the payments for all certifications completed between December 2016 and February 2017 for the remaining Housing Choice Voucher and Project-Based Voucher program participants to ensure that adjustments were appropriately paid.
2018-CH-1001-001-I
Closed on March 18, 2019Implement adequate quality control procedures to ensure that it correctly pays housing assistance.
2018-CH-1001-001-J
Closed on March 18, 2019Ensure that the quality controls over the calculation of housing assistance payments implemented by the Commission are sufficient.
2018-AT-1005 | May 29, 2018
The City of Margate, FL, Did Not Properly Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Grants 1 and 3 in Compliance With HUD Regulations
General Counsel
2018-AT-1005-001-J
Closed on December 12, 2018Initiate appropriate administrative actions and debarments against parties, including the former grants manager and contractors, who contributed to the mismanagement of program funds.
Community Planning and Development
2018-AT-1005-001-A
$457,192Questioned 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 to the program from non-Federal funds the $457,192 ($380,526 $48,420 $28,246) in NSP funds spent for the construction, air conditioning, and engineering services in instances in which procurement activities were not adequately performed.
2018-AT-1005-001-B
$280,979Questioned 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 to the program from non-Federal funds $280,979 in NSP funds spent for property 1012 and identify and repay any additional costs spent on this property, including maintenance costs and any program income generated.
2018-AT-1005-001-C
$73,400Questioned 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 to the program from non-Federal funds the $73,400 in NSP funds spent for mold and asbestos remediation work.
2018-AT-1005-001-D
$8,919Questioned 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 the $8,919 in NSP funds spent on rehabilitation costs or repay to the program from non-Federal funds.
2018-AT-1005-001-E
Closed on September 14, 2023Provide documentation to support a reconciliation between financial records and DRGR and report in HUD’s DRGR system the appropriate amount of program income generated from all NSP1 and NSP3 funds from the inception of the grants.
2018-AT-1005-001-F
Closed on July 20, 2023Provide documentation to support that all NSP properties are properly classified and recorded in HUD’s DRGR system.
2018-AT-1005-001-G
Closed on September 14, 2023Develop and implement policies and procedures to include but not be limited to oversight, effective internal controls, separation of duties, procurement, and overall administration of the program.
2018-AT-1005-001-H
$59,510Questioned 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.
Conduct a review of the remaining 10 properties not reviewed during our audit to ensure compliance with HUD requirements and identify and repay costs related to ineligible or unsupported activities (see appendix C).
2018-AT-1005-001-I
Closed on August 24, 2020For Property 1504, provide documentation to support the recording in HUD’s DRGR system, the repayment of $144,004 in NSP funds and $1,120 in program income.
2018-FW-1801 | May 21, 2018
Final Civil Action: BSR Trust, LLC, Settled Allegations of Making False Claims Related to Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments
General Counsel
2018-FW-1801-001-A
Closed on May 21, 2018$30,000Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Office of General Counsel, Office of Program Enforcement, acknowledge that $30,000 in the settlement agreement represents an amount due HUD.
2018-FW-0802 | May 15, 2018
Interim Report - Potential Antideficiency Act and Generally Accepted Accounting Principle Violations Occurred With Disaster Relief Appropriation Act, 2013, Funds
Chief Financial Officer
2018-FW-0802-001-A
Closed on February 07, 2022$160,360,714Questioned 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.
We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer determine whether the summary expenditures totaling $160,360,714, which exceeded the grant round obligations for the two grantees, were ADA violations. If the transactions were violations, action should be taken as required by the ADA.
2018-FW-0802-001-B
Closed on February 07, 2022$435,263,268Questioned 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.
We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer determine whether the revised and completed detail transactions totaling to $435,263,268, which occurred before and after grant rounds obligation and expenditure dates, were ADA violations. If the transactions were violations, actions should be taken as required by the ADA.
2018-FW-0802-001-C
Closed on March 31, 2020$496,913,235Questioned 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.
We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer determine whether the revised and completed transactions totaling $496,913,235 and made more than a year after the original voucher entry were GAAP violations. If the transactions were violations, appropriate actions should be taken, including but not limited to adjusting the transactions in LOCCS and HUD’s financial statements.