Reimburse the appropriate households $2,663 from non-Federal funds for the underpayment of housing assistance and utility allowances due to inappropriate calculations.
2018-CH-1001 | Junio 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
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-BOpenClosed$2,663Funds 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.
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-COpenClosed$44Questioned 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 the appropriate households $44 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported payments of housing assistance cited in this finding.
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-DOpenClosed$1,877Questioned 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.
Pursue collection from the applicable households or reimburse its program $1,877 from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to unreported income.
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-EOpenClosed$5,065Questioned 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.
Pursue collection from the applicable projects or reimburse its program $5,065 from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance.
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-FOpenClosed$177Funds 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 appropriate projects $177 from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance.
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-GOpenClosed$263Funds 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 appropriate households $263 from program funds for the underpayment of utility allowance reimbursements.
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-HOpenClosed
Review 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.
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-IOpenClosed
Implement adequate quality control procedures to ensure that it correctly pays housing assistance.
- Status2018-CH-1001-001-JOpenClosed
Ensure that the quality controls over the calculation of housing assistance payments implemented by the Commission are sufficient.
2018-AT-1005 | Mayo 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
- Status2018-AT-1005-001-JOpenClosed
Initiate 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
- Status2018-AT-1005-001-EOpenClosed
Provide 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.
- Status2018-AT-1005-001-FOpenClosed
Provide documentation to support that all NSP properties are properly classified and recorded in HUD’s DRGR system.
- Status2018-AT-1005-001-GOpenClosed
Develop 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.
- Status2018-AT-1005-001-HOpenClosed$59,510Questioned 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.
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).
- Status2018-AT-1005-001-IOpenClosed
For 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 | Mayo 21, 2018
Final Civil Action: BSR Trust, LLC, Settled Allegations of Making False Claims Related to Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments
General Counsel
- Status2018-FW-1801-001-AOpenClosed$30,000Questioned 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 Office of General Counsel, Office of Program Enforcement, acknowledge that $30,000 in the settlement agreement represents an amount due HUD.
2018-FW-0802 | Mayo 15, 2018
Interim Report - Potential Antideficiency Act and Generally Accepted Accounting Principle Violations Occurred With Disaster Relief Appropriation Act, 2013, Funds
Chief Financial Officer
- Status2018-FW-0802-001-AOpenClosed$160,360,714Questioned 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 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.
- Status2018-FW-0802-001-BOpenClosed$435,263,268Questioned 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 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.
- Status2018-FW-0802-001-COpenClosed$496,913,235Questioned 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 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.
- Status2018-FW-0802-001-DOpenClosed
We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer enter a 24-month expiration term into LOCCS for Disaster Recovery funding provided by the 2017 Act and monitor to ensure that expenses are not entered before or after the grant period.