We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to provide documentation to show that the five properties for which the homeowners failed to maintain flood insurance were eligible for assistance and documentation to show that the properties were substantially damaged or reimburse from non-Federal funds the $1,336,883 paid to purchase the properties, including incentives for one property. Further, the State should identify and reimburse from non-Federal funds any additional Disaster Recovery funds used to acquire and dispose of the properties.

We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to provide documentation to show that the remaining nine properties were substantially damaged or reimburse from non-Federal funds the $4,158,836 paid to purchase the properties. Further, the State should identify and reimburse from non-Federal funds any additional Disaster Recovery funds used to acquire and dispose of the nine properties.

We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to conduct a review of the universe of properties purchased through the acquisition component of its program to ensure that properties were eligible and reimburse from non-Federal funds the Disaster Recovery funds used in connection with any additional properties found to be ineligible. For example, the State’s review could include verification that (1) its files contained the required substantial damage letters, (2) the letters provided by applicants reflected the most recent substantial damage determination made by local officials, (3) substantial damage determinations were adequately supported, (4) properties met flood hazard requirements, and (5) properties were not FEMA-noncompliant.

We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Grant Programs require the State to provide documentation showing that the acquisition component of its program has ended or improve its controls over the program to ensure that properties purchased are eligible. This recommendation includes but is not limited to updating its policies and procedures and implementing verification processes to ensure that it verifies information provided by applicants and other entities.

Reimburse its HOME program $10,389 ($8,797 $1,592) from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate recertifications and calculations of housing assistance.

Reimburse the four HOME program participants $468 from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate calculations of housing assistance.

Reimburse its CoC program $112,827 ($109,259 $3,568) from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate recertifications and calculations of housing assistance.

Reimburse the three CoC program participants $260 from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate calculations of housing assistance.

Support or reimburse its CoC program $7,309 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported housing assistance payments.

Enforce its policy or implement an alternate method for the CoC program to ensure that annual recertifications are completed in a timely manner and that housing assistance is not issued before the recertification is completed to ensure that $385,660 in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.

Train its program staff on calculating housing assistance payments for the HOME and CoC programs to ensure that payments are appropriately calculated.

Repay its program $22,402 for duplicative charges to HOME activity 2292 from non-Federal funds.

Update and implement changes to the City’s HOME and grants management policies and procedures to prevent similar errors and ensure that HOME draws are accurate and in accordance with HUD requirements.

Deobligate all obligations marked for deobligation during the departmentwide OOR, including as much as $7,517,486 in 187 program obligations and $62,183 in 9 administrative obligations marked for deobligation as of September 30, 2018.

Review the 473 identified inactive retained obligations with remaining balances totaling $43,005,703 and close out and deobligate amounts tied to obligations that are no longer needed.

Review the one identified retained inactive obligation with a remaining balance totaling $60,395 and deobligate amounts that are no longer valid or needed.

Support that grant administration services paid were cost reasonable or reimburse its Program $387,443 from non-Federal funds.

Reimburse its Program $102,069 from non-Federal funds for the duplicate payments made to its subcontractor for lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities.

Coordinate with HUD’s Office of Lead Hazard Control and Healthy Homes to determine whether $88,258 in Program funds ($77,597 $10,661) may be drawn down and used to reimburse its subcontractor if the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities are determined to be eligible.

Determine whether the subcontractor is owed payment for 21 units, which the Department’s records showed were assisted under the Program but were not identified as assisted units according to documentation maintained by the Department to support its drawdowns from HUD’s LOCCS. If the Department determines that the subcontractor is owed payment for the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities, it should provide support that the lead-based paint and other health hazard control activities were eligible and that the subcontractor was not reimbursed for these activities from non-Program funds. If these conditions have been met, the Department should reimburse the subcontractor from Program funds.