We recommend that HUD’s General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development develop guidance clarifying the use of the exhibit for on-site, hybrid, and remote monitoring to ensure a full review of grantees’ compliance with civil rights requirements, and incorporate this guidance into the training developed as a result of recommendation 1A.

Develop a policy or update the existing Grants Management Policy to include 1) the process and controls that HUD will use to hold the prime recipients accountable for FFATA compliance and 2) clearly defined roles and responsibilities between OCFO and the program offices to ensure that action is prioritized by the correct responsible parties regarding FFATA compliance.

Work with applicable program offices to develop training materials and tools, such as dashboards, to assist program offices in monitoring their grant portfolios for subaward reporting compliance.

We recommend that the Director of CPD’s Office of Disaster Recovery require active disaster recovery grantees to report in DRGR other sources of funding used for non-Federal match activities.

We recommend that the Director of CPD’s Office of Disaster Recovery develop and implement internal controls to ensure that grantees completely and accurately report non-Federal match activities in DRGR.

We recommend that HUD work with Connecticut and Shelby County to fully realize the program benefits by (1) assessing whether any of the current project activities need to be replaced with more viable project activities, thereby ensuring that any modifications to the project activities will lessen the susceptibility of rain and flood events; (2) assessing whether administrative funds have been properly allocated and charged to identify any possible cost savings; (3) determining whether enough administrative funds or other available funds exist to complete the administration of the grant project activities; and (4) developing and implementing a written plan of action that will assist with expediting the project activities that could reasonably be expected to be completed by the September 30, 2029, deadline.

We recommend that HUD conduct onsite or remote monitoring for the City of Minot and Tennessee, which have not had any monitoring since grant inception, to ensure that these grantees are on track to meet their program goals.

We recommend that HUD for grantees with delayed project activities (California, Connecticut, Louisiana, Tennessee, Virginia, New York City, Minot, and Shelby County), require each grantee to provide a detailed timeline with milestone dates of when projects should be completed and provide updates to ensure that grantees stay on schedule.

We recommend that HUD for its disaster-related program wide activities, revise the action plan and quarterly performance review checklists to a format that more specifically and directly addresses the subject program.

We recommend that HUD for its disaster-related program wide activities, require grantees to provide documentation showing that they have upfront collaboration with partnering entities in executing the grant program. If the grantee plans to hire contractors, HUD should ensure that grantees have a plan to quickly onboard contractors early in the program.

Review whether potential violations of the Antideficiency Act took place because of implementing or enforcing any nondisclosure policies, forms, or agreements that do not include the anti-gag provision as required by law. If it is determined that a violation occurred, the Chief Financial Officer should take disciplinary actions as appropriate and report the identified violations to the oversight authorities, including the HUD Secretary, the President, the Office of Management and Budget, Congress, and the Comptroller General.

We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations of Community Planning and Development enhance CPDs existing Grant Accrual Standard Operating Procedures to strengthen governance within CPD and to effectively work within the framework established by the OCFO in recommendation 1A. The updated procedures should include increased ownership and oversight over the reviews, authorizations, approvals, and changes to the CPD grant accrual estimates and methodology.

We recommend that the Chief Financial Officer enhance existing policies to establish a formal grant accrual risk management framework to help ensure consistent standards across HUD with regard to the development, review, and execution of the grant accrual and validation. This framework should include 1) identifying grant accrual estimation risk, assessing the magnitude of this risk, and managing the risks that arise when using certain quantitative estimation methods, 2) a governance structure that includes estimation ownership, oversight, and framework assessment, 3) the creation of a committee that is responsible for establishing a holistic approach to estimation risk management, including key stakeholders from OCFO and program offices, such as CPD, and 4) a requirement for documentation of committee meeting agendas, minutes, and key decisions and discussion points which impacts the various grant accrual methodologies across the Department.

Take corrective action for the subrecipient monitoring and agreement issues cited for eight of the ESG-CV grantees reviewed, and provide additional guidance and technical assistance as needed to ensure that they understand requirements.

Develop and implement additional subrecipient monitoring training and guidance for all ESG grantees.

Improve or enhance its antifraud efforts for the ESG program and incorporate fraud risk management practices that are consistent with the best practices identified in the Government Accountability Office’s A Framework for Managing Fraud Risks in Federal Programs and Chief Financial Officers Council and Treasury Bureau of the Fiscal Services’ Antifraud Playbook.

Obtain training or technical assistance as needed on the implementation of fraud risk management practices.

Establish a separate fraud risk management framework or evaluate and build upon its ERM framework by incorporating fraud risk management practices that are consistent with the principles of GAO’s Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book), including developing a fraud risk management framework in alignment with best practices identified in GAO’s A Framework for Managing Fraud Risks in Federal Programs and the Chief Financial Officers Council’s Antifraud Playbook.

Obtain training or technical assistance on the implementation of fraud risk management practices consistent with the principles of GAO’s Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book).

Develop and fully implement a departmentwide policy for the monthly transaction review process that requires program office participation and timely completion of the review and certification.