Develop and implement a financial management system in accordance with HUD requirements, including but not limited to permitting the disbursement of funds in a timely manner.
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-AOpenClosedClosed on May 12, 2025
- Status2019-AT-1005-001-COpenClosed$1,641Funds 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.
Closed on November 12, 2024Require the Municipality to return to its line of credit and put to better use $1,641 associated with the unspent program funds that have been carried over since December 2017.
- Status2019-AT-1005-001-DOpenClosed$106Questioned 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.
Closed on July 17, 2020Reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds the $106 paid for ineligible bank penalties.
- Status2019-AT-1005-001-EOpenClosedClosed on May 05, 2025
Establish and implement adequate controls and procedures to permit proper accountability for all CDBG funds to ensure that they are used solely for authorized purposes and properly safeguarded.
- Status2019-AT-1005-002-AOpenClosed$469,974Questioned 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.
Closed on April 01, 2025Submit supporting documentation showing how $469,974 in CDBG funds disbursed for street improvements was properly used and in accordance with HUD requirements or reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2019-AT-1005-002-BOpenClosedClosed on March 28, 2025
Determine the amount spent for the resurfacing of the 16 private properties identified and reimburse the CDBG program from non-Federal funds.
- Status2019-AT-1005-002-COpenClosedClosed on March 10, 2025
Establish and implement adequate policies and procedures, including project inspection protocols, to ensure that CDBG funds are used for activities that meet a national objective, are used for eligible purposes, and are properly supported.
2019-BO-1003 | August 05, 2019
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Did Not Always Ensure That Its Grantees Complied With Applicable State and Federal Laws and Requirements
Community Planning and Development
- Status2019-BO-1003-001-AOpenClosed$665,920Questioned 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.
Closed on March 23, 2022Repay from non-Federal funds the $665,920 in ineligible costs charged to the program
- Status2019-BO-1003-001-BOpenClosed$494,517Questioned 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.
Closed on December 03, 2019Support that 14 projects, with $494,517 in construction costs, met the environmental review requirements and repay from non-Federal funds any amounts attributed to projects that cannot be certified.
- Status2019-BO-1003-001-COpenClosedClosed on February 16, 2021
Provide additional guidance to their grantees and strengthen controls to ensure that tier two environmental reviews are performed and properly conducted and signed by the responsible entity before committing program funds.
- Status2019-BO-1003-001-DOpenClosed$401,870Questioned 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.
Closed on December 03, 2019Support $401,870 for contracts that were awarded without an independent cost estimate or repay from non-Federal funds any amount that cannot be supported.
- Status2019-BO-1003-001-EOpenClosedClosed on February 16, 2021
Provide additional guidance to their grantees and strengthen controls over procurement to ensure that grantees follow applicable State and Federal procurement requirements, including obtaining independent cost estimates and ensuring full and open competition.
- Status2019-BO-1003-001-FOpenClosedClosed on February 16, 2021
Define which expenses should be considered program delivery costs and strengthen controls over program costs to ensure that costs are properly charged.
2019-PH-1003 | August 02, 2019
PK Management, LLC, Richmond Heights, OH, Did Not Always Maintain Documentation Required to Support Housing Assistance Payments
Housing
- Status2019-PH-1003-001-AOpenClosed$497,762Questioned 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.
Closed on October 26, 2022Provide documentation to support housing assistance payments the projects received totaling $497,762 or reimburse HUD from nonproject funds for any amount that it cannot support.
- Status2019-PH-1003-001-BOpenClosedClosed on April 06, 2022
Implement controls to ensure that it maintains adequate documentation in the tenant files to show that tenants were eligible for assistance and that the housing assistance payments were supported.
2019-NY-1003 | August 02, 2019
New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, New York, NY, Did Not Always Ensure That Units Met Housing Quality Standards but Generally Abated Payments When Required
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2019-NY-1003-001-AOpenClosedClosed on January 10, 2022
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New York Office of Public and Indian Housing require HPD to certify, along with the owners of the 52 units cited in the finding, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected.
- Status2019-NY-1003-001-BOpenClosed$28,303Questioned 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.
Closed on March 09, 2021We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New York Office of Public and Indian Housing require HPD to reimburse its program $28,303 from non-Federal funds ($26,044 for housing assistance payments and $2,259 in associated administrative fees) for the six units that materially failed to meet HUD’s housing quality standards.
- Status2019-NY-1003-001-COpenClosed$760,363Funds 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.
Closed on June 21, 2021We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New York Office of Public and Indian Housing require HPD to improve controls over its inspection process to ensure that program units meet housing quality standards and that the results of inspections are used to enhance the effectiveness of its housing quality standards inspections, thereby ensuring that an estimated $760,363 in future program funds is spent for units that meet HUD’s housing quality standards. These controls include but are not limited to controls to ensure that (1) inspectors apply their training to thoroughly inspect units and consistently categorize failure items, (2) inspectors use a form that includes the key aspects of housing quality standards performance and acceptability criteria, and (3) results data are accurate and comply with applicable requirements.
- Status2019-NY-1003-001-DOpenClosedClosed on July 16, 2021
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New York Office of Public and Indian Housing require HPD to improve controls over the housing quality standards quality control inspections to ensure that quality control inspections meet HUD’s minimum sample size and that the sample is drawn from recently completed housing quality standards inspections.
- Status2019-NY-1003-001-EOpenClosedClosed on October 06, 2021
We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New York Office of Public and Indian Housing require HPD to improve controls over its abatement process to ensure that it consistently (1) starts abatement when required, (2) verifies and documents the correction of violations, (3) resumes housing assistance payments after the end of the abatement period, and (4) maintains sufficient documentation to support the abatement and reinstatement for each unit.