We recommend that Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require two grantees to repay $167,254,244 for grants funds spent in excess of the amount obligated for a round.
2019-FW-0001 | May 17, 2019
HUD CPD Did Not Enforce the Disaster Appropriations Act, 2013, 24-Month Grantee Expenditure Requirement
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-FW-0001-001-AOpenClosed$167,254,244Questioned 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.
- Status2019-FW-0001-001-BOpenClosed$24,409,255Questioned 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 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require five grantees to repay $24,409,255 for grant funds spent before the grantee had signed a grant round agreement obligating the funds.
- Status2019-FW-0001-001-COpenClosed$334,441,871Questioned 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 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require four grantees to repay $334,441,871 for grant funds spent by the grantee after the grant round’s 24-month expenditure deadline had expired.
- Status2019-FW-0001-001-DOpenClosed$524,289Questioned 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 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs recapture $524,289 in grant funds, which the grantee had not reported spent by the grant round expenditure deadline, and return the funds to the U.S. Treasury as HUD can no longer reobligate the funds.
- Status2019-FW-0001-001-EOpenClosed$413,530,414Funds 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 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs adopt and enforce new written policies, procedures, and internal controls for all CDBG Disaster Recovery funds that have a statutory grantee expenditure deadline, which will ensure that $413,530,414 in 2013 Act funds will be put to better use.
- Status2019-FW-0001-001-FOpenClosed
We recommend that Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs take action to correct and address the DRGR system material internal control weaknesses identified in this report.
2019-BO-1001 | April 25, 2019
The City of Bridgeport, CT, Did Not Properly Administer Its HOME Program
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-AOpenClosed$422,768Questioned 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 from non-Federal funds the $422,768 in ineligible funds related to the City’s failure to meet HOME CHDO commitment deadlines and complete activities in accordance with the HOME agreement and HOME regulations.
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-BOpenClosed$3,388,181Questioned 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 that $3,136,798 in HOME funds disbursed was reasonable and supported in accordance with Federal requirements or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported.
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-COpenClosed$130,667Questioned 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 that the City properly administered the HOME program and earned $130,667 in HOME administrative fees or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-DOpenClosed$487,483Funds 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.
Reallocate the $487,483 in unspent funds to ensure that they will be put to their intended use or, if the activities remain open, maintain support to show that the HOME funds disbursed were reasonable and Reallocate the $487,483 in unspent funds to ensure that they will be put to their intended use or, if the activities remain open, maintain support to show that the HOME funds disbursed were reasonable and supported in accordance with Federal requirements.
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-EOpenClosed$254,215Funds 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.
Identify, review, and approve a CHDO to work with the City to ensure that $254,215 in CHDO funds will be properly committed to avoid being deobligated.
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-FOpenClosed
Establish underwriting policies and procedures to ensure that HOME activities are consistent and meet Federal requirements.
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-GOpenClosed
Develop and implement adequate environmental policies and procedures to ensure that environmental reviews are properly documented and supported and that HUD and Federal environmental requirements have been followed before committing HOME funds to an activity.
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-HOpenClosed
Develop and implement adequate policies and procedures to ensure that fixed HOME units are identified and adequate documentation is maintained to support tenant eligibility and compliance with HOME rental limits for the entire affordability period.
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-IOpenClosed
Develop and implement tools to improve record-keeping practices to support the eligibility, necessity, and reasonableness of the HOME activities.
- Status2019-BO-1001-001-JOpenClosed
Provide technical assistance to the City to ensure that responsible staff receives necessary environmental, underwriting, and overall program administration training.
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.
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-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.