Provide documentation to support that $658,261 in loan proceeds was used for an eligible NSP2 activity or property or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
2021-LA-1002 | January 05, 2021
Neighborhood Housing Services of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Follow Program Requirements in Administering Its NSP2
Community Planning and Development
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-COpenClosed$658,261Questioned 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.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-DOpenClosed$500,000Questioned 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.
Provide documentation to support that $500,000 in NSP funds transferred to the revolving loan fund was used for an eligible NSP2 activity or property or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-GOpenClosed
Amend the NSP2 action plan to include its revolving loan fund.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-HOpenClosed
Adjust program income calculation methodology to ensure it is in accordance with HUD requirements.
- Status2021-LA-1002-001-IOpenClosed
Submit overdue NSP2 quarterly reports to DRGR and update prior reports that did not accurately report program income activity.
- Status2021-LA-1002-002-AOpenClosed$1,388,545Questioned 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 adequate documentation to support its administrative and project delivery cost expenditures or repay the program $1,388,545 from non-Federal funds.
- Status2021-LA-1002-002-EOpenClosed
Obtain training to ensure that it understands NSP2 regulations and requirements related to payroll allocation for its administrative and project delivery costs and program income calculation methodology to ensure it properly computes the amount it is allowed to charge for administrative costs.
- Status2021-LA-1002-003-AOpenClosed$856,692Questioned 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 South Gate contract or repay NSP2 $856,692 from non-Federal funds.
2021-LA-1001 | October 27, 2020
The City of Compton, Compton, CA, Did Not Always Administer Neighborhood Stabilization Program Funds in Compliance With Procedures and Regulations
Community Planning and Development
- Status2021-LA-1001-002-AOpenClosed$270,656Questioned 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 the required documents to support $161,131 in NSP1 and $109,525 in NSP3 funds for expenses for acquisition, rehabilitation, and administration. If the City cannot provide the required documents, it should repay the U.S. Treasury from non-Federal funds.
2020-CH-0005 | August 21, 2020
HUD Needs To Improve Its Oversight of Lead in the Water of Multifamily Housing Units
Housing
- Status2020-CH-0005-001-AOpenClosedPriorityPriority
We believe these open recommendations, if implemented, will have the greatest impact on helping HUD achieve its mission to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all.
Require lenders to obtain the borrowers’ consent to verify the existence of delinquent Federal taxes with the IRS during loan origination and deny any applicant with delinquent Federal tax debt and no payment plan or a noncompliant payment plan or an applicant refusing to provide consent from receiving FHA insurance to put at least $6.1 billion to better use by avoiding potential future costs to the FHA insurance fund.
Status
As of January 2026, the Office of Multifamily has developed standard operating procedures for its field office staff and plans to issue additional guidance to HUD staff and multifamily property owners on addressing lead in the water for multifamily properties. Although the final action target date has passed, the guidance is undergoing HUD's internal review clearance process. HUD did not provide an estimated date for issuance of the guidance to close the recommendation.
Analysis
To fully address this recommendation, the Office of Multifamily Housing must provide evidence of an action plan or policy that includes procedures to ensure households living in multifamily units have a sufficient supply of safe drinking water.
Implementation of this recommendation will enable HUD to have sufficient oversight and control activities in place to ensure households living in multifamily housing have a sufficient supply of safe drinking water.
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
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.
- 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.
2019-KC-0003 | September 30, 2019
FHA Insured at Least $13 Billion in Loans to Ineligible Borrowers With Delinquent Federal Tax Debt
Housing
- Status2019-KC-0003-001-AOpenClosed$6,130,757,970Funds 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.
PriorityPriorityWe believe these open recommendations, if implemented, will have the greatest impact on helping HUD achieve its mission to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all.
Require lenders to obtain the borrowers’ consent to verify the existence of delinquent Federal taxes with the IRS during loan origination and deny any applicant with delinquent Federal tax debt and no payment plan or a noncompliant payment plan or an applicant refusing to provide consent from receiving FHA insurance to put at least $6.1 billion to better use by avoiding potential future costs to the FHA insurance fund.
2019-CH-1003 | September 03, 2019
The Management Agent for Lake View Towers Apartments, Chicago, IL, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Section 8 HAP Program Requirements
Housing
- Status2019-CH-1003-001-AOpenClosed$30,037Questioned 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 HUD $30,037 from nonproject funds for the overpayment of housing assistance and utility allowances due to incorrect calculations.
- Status2019-CH-1003-001-COpenClosed$159,938Questioned 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 HUD $159,938 from nonproject funds for the unsupported payments of housing assistance cited in the finding.
- Status2019-CH-1003-001-DOpenClosed$26,915Questioned 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 household or reimburse HUD $26,915 from nonproject funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to unreported income.
- Status2019-CH-1003-001-EOpenClosed$54,257Funds 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.
Implement adequate quality control procedures to ensure that housing assistance payments are appropriately calculated and supported. These procedures and controls should ensure that $54,257 in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.
- Status2019-CH-1003-001-HOpenClosed
Ensure that the management agent’s staff is properly trained and familiar with HUD’s and the project’s requirements regarding housing assistance payments calculations.
2019-AT-1005 | August 09, 2019
The Municipality of Yauco, PR, Did Not Always Administer Its CDBG Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-AT-1005-001-BOpenClosed$1,257,555Questioned 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.
Ensure that $1,045,085 in CDBG funds drawn from HUD between July 1, 2015, and October 31, 2018, can be traced to a level, which ensures that such funds have not been used in violation of the restrictions and prohibitions of applicable statutes, or reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds. Footnote 2: Total drawdowns of more than $1.5 million were adjusted to consider $106 questioned in recommendation 1D and $469,974 in recommendation 2A.