We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to support $1,063,364 or repay its CDBG-DR program from non-Federal funds for payments made to one prequalified contractor under its home repair program without independent cost estimates and cost analyses.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to support $170,066 or repay its CDBG-DR program from non-Federal funds for payments made to the demolition contractor under its housing buyout program without independent cost estimates and cost analyses.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to support $27,250 or repay its CDBG-DR program from non-Federal funds for payments made to three appraisal contractors under its housing buyout program without cost analyses.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to develop and implement a HUD-approved written plan and checklists that will correct and prevent the deficiencies outlined in the finding.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to provide training to City staff to ensure that it understands and follows procurement requirements, such as performing independent cost estimates, cost analysis, scoring, including all contract provisions, ensuring that subrecipients understand and follow procurement requirements, and maintaining appropriate procurement documentation.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to Update its procurement policies and procedures to ensure compliance with disaster assistance program requirements

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Office of Community Planning and Development require the City to ensure that monitoring includes a review of its subrecipients’ (1) policies and procedures to ensure that the policies and procedures are current and comply with HUD requirements, (2) documentation supporting cost reasonableness to ensure that the documentation is sufficient, and (3) training provided regarding procurement and other program requirements to ensure that trainings are adequate.

We recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to provide its plan to continuously monitor Harris County’s pace and performance in its remaining Hurricane Harvey CDBG-DR program and take appropriate action to ensure that program goals are met. The plan should include a process for repurposing additional grant funds, if necessary, to avoid potential recapture due to Harris County’s inability to meet the expenditure deadline established under its subrecipient agreement with the Texas GLO, and to allow the Texas GLO to meet the expenditure deadline for its grant award.

We recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to set performance and financial milestones, including approval of Harris County’s projects and obligation and expenditure of funds, for all programs and activities funded under the Harris County subrecipient agreement through the remainder of the contract and deadlines for Harris County to achieve those milestones. This would include the Texas GLO (1) providing its plan to continually assess whether Harris County is meeting the established milestones within the prescribed time period; (2) taking appropriate action as outlined in the subrecipient agreement for any missed deadlines; and (3) , if necessary, determining whether additional programs need to be combined or eliminated from the subrecipient agreement.

We recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to provide evidence of subrecipient monitoring of Harris County’s capacity to manage its Hurricane Harvey grant funds to address duplicative, inefficient, and cost-prohibitive processes or positions. The evidence should include any corrective actions that have been imposed and Harris County’s response.

We recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to ensure that Harris County obtains adequate training for its program staff and that the staff continuously demonstrates their understanding of and competence to operate Harris County’s programs within applicable requirements. This would include ensuring that Harris County takes appropriate steps to remedy situations where staff are not operating the program within applicable requirements.

We recommend that the Director of the Office of Block Grant Assistance require the Texas GLO to review Harris County’s Housing Reimbursement Program policies, including assistance prioritization, to ensure compliance with the Texas GLO’s action plan and amendments. This would include the Texas GLO analyzing the County’s project pipeline to determine whether changes are warranted to ensure that those most in need are prioritized to receive limited Federal assistance. The Texas GLO should provide HUD with an analysis of the County’s project pipeline within 90 days of its review to share the results and demonstrate compliance with its action plan.

Develop and issue a departmentwide policy that notes that radon is a radioactive substance and outlines HUD's requirements to test for and mitigate excessive radon levels in accordance with 24 CFR 50.3(i)(1) and 58.5(i)(2)(i).

Corrective Action Taken

None Given.

Develop and provide training for applicable program staff, grantees, and PHAs on radon testing and mitigation requirements.

Develop and implement an effective radon policy to ensure that CPD program activities comply with the departmentwide policy on radon testing and mitigation requirements.

Provide the MOU with EPA designed to address radon contamination.

Provide documentation to support that program activities within NHSLA’s interfund were for eligible NSP2 activities or repay the program $3,425,679 from non-Federal funds.

Return the outstanding balance of $529,745 owed to NSP2. In addition, cease the practice of depositing NSP2 funds in non-NSP2 accounts and making them available to be used or borrowed for non-NSP2 activities.

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.

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.