Ensure that the 55 developments without sufficient support for an exemption either support the exemption status or complete the required lead-based paint inspections and provide the documentation to the appropriate field office.
2020-CH-0003 | March 18, 2020
HUD Lacked Adequate Oversight of Public Housing Agencies’ Compliance With the Lead Safe Housing Rule
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2020-CH-0003-001-COpenClosed
- Status2020-CH-0003-001-DOpenClosed
Ensure that the remaining 244 developments’ exemption status is properly supported.
- Status2020-CH-0003-001-EOpenClosed
Ensure that the 382 potentially noncompliant developments are reported in its response tracking system and reviewed for compliance with the Lead Safe Housing Rule.
- Status2020-CH-0003-001-FOpenClosed
Implement adequate procedures and controls for monitoring public housing agencies’ compliance with the Lead Safe Housing Rule. Such procedures and controls should include but not limited to establishing timeframes for reporting potentially noncompliant developments in its tracking system and implementing corrective actions and resolution.
- Status2020-CH-0003-001-GOpenClosed
Develop a framework for taking administrative actions against public housing agencies that do not comply with HUD’s Lead Safe Rule.
- Status2020-CH-0003-001-HOpenClosed
Continue its efforts to identify and train staff on how to use the response tracker.
- Status2020-CH-0003-001-IOpenClosed
Continue its efforts to resolve technical issues that prevented the addition of new cases into the response tracker.
- Status2020-CH-0003-001-JOpenClosed
Establish policies, procedures, and controls for validating and correcting construction dates of the public housing developments in IMS-PIC. If the information is determined to be inaccurate, HUD should work with public housing agencies to update the data to ensure accuracy.
2020-LA-1002 | March 10, 2020
The Housing Authority of the City of Long Beach, CA, Did Not Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2020-LA-1002-001-AOpenClosed
Develop and implement a HUD-approved cost allocation plan(s) that appropriately represents the benefit received by the Authority from the City’s HHS department and allocates overhead and operating costs to all programs managed by the Authority.
- Status2020-LA-1002-001-BOpenClosed$1,965,990Questioned 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 the eligibility of the $1,965,990 in overhead allocations through the application of a HUD-approved allocation plan (including offsetting the amount by applicable reimbursements) or repay the Housing Choice Voucher Program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2020-LA-1002-001-COpenClosed$50,947Questioned 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.
Determine the appropriate amount of general operating costs totaling $2,544,266 that applied to the Housing Choice Voucher Program in accordance with a HUD-approved cost allocation plan (including offsetting the amount by applicable reimbursements) and repay overcharges (estimated at $50,947) to the Program from the other applicable programs as appropriate or from non-Federal funds.
- Status2020-LA-1002-001-DOpenClosed$25,827Questioned 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.
Support the eligibility of the $25,827 in personnel expenses from SPC (including offsetting the amount by applicable reimbursements) or repay its Housing Choice Voucher Program from the other applicable programs as appropriate or from non-Federal funds.
- Status2020-LA-1002-001-EOpenClosed$64,150Questioned 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 the eligibility of the $64,150 for accounting services charged to the Housing Choice Voucher Program that applied to other Authority programs (including offsetting the amount by applicable reimbursements) or repay the Program from the other applicable programs as appropriate or from non-Federal funds.
- Status2020-LA-1002-002-AOpenClosed$340,701Questioned 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 the reasonableness of the $340,701 Casterline contracts or repay the Housing Choice Voucher Program any amount that cannot be supported using non-Federal funds.
- Status2020-LA-1002-002-BOpenClosed$33,415Questioned 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 the reasonableness of the $33,415 Genesis contract or repay any amount that cannot be supported from non-Federal funds.
- Status2020-LA-1002-002-COpenClosed
Establish and implement additional procedures and controls to ensure that City personnel responsible for administering procurement on the Authority’s behalf follow procurement and contracting requirements and maintain applicable supporting documentation in accordance with HUD requirements.
- Status2020-LA-1002-003-AOpenClosed$5,648Questioned 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 the Housing Choice Voucher Program $5,648 from non-Federal funds for the unallowable expenses.
- Status2020-LA-1002-003-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement procedures and controls to ensure that ineligible food costs are not charged to the Program.
2019-OE-0001 | February 04, 2020
HUD Has Not Referred Troubled Public Housing Agencies as the Law and Regulations Require
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-OE-0001-01OpenClosed
Refer troubled PHAs directly to the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing when they have not met the 1- or 2-year recovery requirements.
- Status2019-OE-0001-02OpenClosed
Ensure that referrals to the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing recommend only recovery options allowed by the law and regulations.