Provide supporting documentation for the participant’s eligibility (tenant code t0019221) or repay its program $13,885 from non-Federal funds for the housing assistance payments and any subsequent payments made.
2019-LA-1004 | April 17, 2019
The Housing Authority of the County of Stanislaus, Modesto, CA, Did Not Always Adequately Document Homeless Eligibility in Accordance With Shelter Plus Care Program Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-LA-1004-001-AOpenClosed$21,052Questioned 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-LA-1005 | April 17, 2019
The Housing Authority of the County of San Bernardino, CA, Did Not Adequately Support Administrative Fees Charged to Its Continuum of Care Grants
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-LA-1005-001-AOpenClosed$663,070Questioned 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 for the administrative fees or repay the Continuum of Care grants $663,070 from non-Federal funds. (See appendix D.)
- Status2019-LA-1005-001-BOpenClosed
Submit an indirect cost rate schedule for its Continuum of Care grants to HUD for approval.
- Status2019-LA-1005-001-COpenClosed
Develop and implement written policies and procedures for its administrative fee charges.
2019-NY-1001 | March 29, 2019
The State of New York Did Not Ensure That Properties Purchased Under the Acquisition Component of Its Program Were Eligible
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-NY-1001-001-AOpenClosed$2,595,127Questioned 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 reimburse from non-Federal funds the $2,595,127 paid to purchase six properties that were not substantially damaged. Further, the State should identify and reimburse from non-Federal funds any additional Disaster Recovery funds used to acquire and dispose of the properties.
- Status2019-NY-1001-001-BOpenClosed$783,571Questioned 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 reimburse from non-Federal funds the $783,571 paid to purchase two properties that did not comply with flood hazard requirements and for which the State did not have sufficient documentation to show that the properties were substantially damaged. Further, the State should identify and reimburse from non-Federal funds any additional Disaster Recovery funds used to acquire and dispose of the properties.
- Status2019-NY-1001-001-COpenClosed$435,069Questioned 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 hardship letter provided for a property located outside the 500-year floodplain and documentation to show that the property was substantially damaged or reimburse from non-Federal funds the $435,069 in settlement costs paid to purchase the property. Further, the State should identify and reimburse from non-Federal funds any additional Disaster Recovery funds used to acquire and dispose of the property.
- Status2019-NY-1001-001-DOpenClosed$183,500Questioned 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 reimburse from non-Federal funds the $183,500 in incentives paid to a homeowner that failed to maintain flood insurance.
- Status2019-NY-1001-001-EOpenClosed$1,336,883Questioned 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 the five properties for which the homeowners failed to maintain flood insurance were eligible for assistance and documentation to show that the properties were substantially damaged or reimburse from non-Federal funds the $1,336,883 paid to purchase the properties, including incentives for one property. Further, the State should identify and reimburse from non-Federal funds any additional Disaster Recovery funds used to acquire and dispose of the properties.
- Status2019-NY-1001-001-FOpenClosed$4,158,836Questioned 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 the remaining nine properties were substantially damaged or reimburse from non-Federal funds the $4,158,836 paid to purchase the properties. Further, the State should identify and reimburse from non-Federal funds any additional Disaster Recovery funds used to acquire and dispose of the nine properties.
- Status2019-NY-1001-001-GOpenClosed
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to conduct a review of the universe of properties purchased through the acquisition component of its program to ensure that properties were eligible and reimburse from non-Federal funds the Disaster Recovery funds used in connection with any additional properties found to be ineligible. For example, the State’s review could include verification that (1) its files contained the required substantial damage letters, (2) the letters provided by applicants reflected the most recent substantial damage determination made by local officials, (3) substantial damage determinations were adequately supported, (4) properties met flood hazard requirements, and (5) properties were not FEMA-noncompliant.
- Status2019-NY-1001-001-HOpenClosed
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to provide documentation showing that the acquisition component of its program has ended or improve its controls over the program to ensure that properties purchased are eligible. This recommendation includes but is not limited to updating its policies and procedures and implementing verification processes to ensure that it verifies information provided by applicants and other entities.
2019-AT-1002 | March 18, 2019
Louisville Metro, Louisville, KY, Did Not Always Administer the TBRA Activity in Its HOME and CoC Programs in Accordance With Program Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-AT-1002-001-AOpenClosed$10,389Questioned 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 HOME program $10,389 ($8,797 $1,592) from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate recertifications and calculations of housing assistance.
- Status2019-AT-1002-001-BOpenClosed$468Funds 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 four HOME program participants $468 from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate calculations of housing assistance.
- Status2019-AT-1002-001-COpenClosed$112,827Questioned 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 CoC program $112,827 ($109,259 $3,568) from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate recertifications and calculations of housing assistance.
- Status2019-AT-1002-001-DOpenClosed$260Funds 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 three CoC program participants $260 from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate calculations of housing assistance.
- Status2019-AT-1002-001-EOpenClosed$7,309Questioned 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 CoC program $7,309 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported housing assistance payments.
- Status2019-AT-1002-001-FOpenClosed$385,660Funds 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.
Enforce its policy or implement an alternate method for the CoC program to ensure that annual recertifications are completed in a timely manner and that housing assistance is not issued before the recertification is completed to ensure that $385,660 in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.
- Status2019-AT-1002-001-GOpenClosed
Train its program staff on calculating housing assistance payments for the HOME and CoC programs to ensure that payments are appropriately calculated.
2019-LA-1003 | February 20, 2019
The City of San Bernardino, CA, Did Not Fully Administer Its HOME Investment Partnerships Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-LA-1003-001-AOpenClosed$22,402Questioned 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 its program $22,402 for duplicative charges to HOME activity 2292 from non-Federal funds.