Complete a cost breakdown to support the $10,731 spent on a rental property, which included assistance to an ineligible unit, and repay the ineligible assistance to the U.S. Treasury from non-Federal funds.
2018-KC-1002 | April 06, 2018
The Kansas City, MO, Health Department Did Not Spend Lead Based Paint Hazard Control Grant Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Lead Hazard Control
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-BOpenClosed$10,731Questioned 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.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-COpenClosed$1,803,705Questioned 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.
Recalculate annual income for participants assisted with the 2014 lead hazard control grant to support the $1,803,705 spent. For any assistance the Health Department cannot support with complete income calculations, it should repay the U.S. Treasury from non-Federal funds, less any amount repaid as a result of recommendations 1B and 2A.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-DOpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures that clarify the definition of annual income to be used, calculation components, and the documentation required to calculate income.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-EOpenClosed
Develop and implement procedures for quality control reviews to ensure that annual income is properly calculated.
- Status2018-KC-1002-001-FOpenClosed
Provide training on HUD’s income requirements to employees responsible for calculating income.
- Status2018-KC-1002-002-AOpenClosed$79,738Questioned 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 support showing the $79,738 spent on window replacement qualified or repay the U.S. Treasury from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-KC-1002-002-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that all windows replaced meet lead hazard qualifications.
- Status2018-KC-1002-002-COpenClosed
Develop and implement quality control procedures to ensure that all bid specifications are reviewed for qualified items based on the risk assessment results.
- Status2018-KC-1002-003-AOpenClosed
Update the Health Department’s work plan to include policies and procedures for defining, determining, and documenting relocation hardship for all participants.
- Status2018-KC-1002-004-AOpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that the property owners receive the required information concerning lead-based paint disclosure requirements, risk assessment results, summaries of treatments and clearances, and ongoing maintenance activities, including how to report paint deterioration.
2018-LA-1003 | March 29, 2018
The City of South Gate, CA, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2018-LA-1003-001-AOpenClosed$811,325Questioned 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 the $811,325 in code enforcement costs (activities 591, 619, and 645), including meeting code enforcement and salary and benefit requirements,4 or repay the program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1003-001-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement a targeted code enforcement strategy that specifies deteriorating or deteriorated areas where code enforcement would be expected to arrest decline. The strategy should include a description of public or private improvements, rehabilitation, or services that would help facilitate code enforcement and also include performance metrics to track progress.
- Status2018-LA-1003-001-COpenClosed
Develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that code enforcement salaries and benefits are charged and documented in accordance with program requirements.
- Status2018-LA-1003-002-AOpenClosed$285,496Questioned 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 $285,496 in graffiti abatement expenditures or repay the program from non-Federal funds (appendix D).
- Status2018-LA-1003-002-BOpenClosed
Develop and implement procedures and controls to ensure that graffiti abatement expenditures, including salaries and benefits, are accurately charged to CDBG grants and properly supported.
2018-LA-1002 | February 22, 2018
The County of San Diego, San Diego, CA, Did Not Support Continuum of Care Match and Payroll Costs in Accordance With Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2018-LA-1002-001-AOpenClosed$54,473Questioned 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 unsupported amount of match for its subgrantee or repay HUD $54,473 from non-Federal funds (appendix D).
- Status2018-LA-1002-001-BOpenClosed
Implement written procedures to include the confirmation of match funds as part of its annual monitoring reviews of each subgrantee.
- Status2018-LA-1002-001-COpenClosed
Develop and implement a written plan for its subgrantees to provide and submit supporting documentation for match funds at the end of each grant term.
- Status2018-LA-1002-002-AOpenClosed$12,109Questioned 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 sampled retroactive payroll costs totaling $12,109, which correspond to the actual time attributed to grants CA0689L9D011502, CA0880L9D011501, CA0881L9D011501, and CA0945L9D011506, or reimburse HUD from non-Federal funds.
- Status2018-LA-1002-002-BOpenClosed
Identify retroactive payroll for remaining grants (CA1162L9D011504, CA1024L9D011501, CA0694L9D011508, and CA0693L9D011508) and provide adequate documentation to support the cost or repay HUD from non-Federal funds.