Require the Authority and Majestic Management to support $568,023 spent on payroll allocated to the projects or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.

Require the Authority and Majestic Management to reimburse from non-Federal funds the $109,665 in ineligible expenses that Majestic Management charged to the projects.

Require the Authority and Majestic Management to repay any excessive annual leave that Majestic Management paid to its employees from project funds when its contract terminated in 2017.

Require the Authority to provide training on procurement requirements in public housing to all Majestic Management employees working at the projects.

Require the Authority and Majestic Management to support that the $487,422 spent on goods and services for the projects was a reasonable cost and the goods and services were procured from eligible vendors or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.

Require the Authority to review all other payments to the sampled vendors to confirm that the costs were reasonable and the goods and services were procured from eligible vendors or repay the projects from non-Federal funds.

Require the Authority to monitor Majestic Management to ensure that the recent training was effective and the new checklist is in use and effective.

Require the Authority to recompute the rents for the households noted above and as necessary for errors made by Majestic Management, reimburse tenants for overcharged rent from operating funds or rent credit, and enter into repayment agreements with tenants if they were undercharged based on nondisclosure of income.

Support or reimburse its ESG program participants $705 from non-Federal funds for the inadequately supported pay request.

Support or reimburse HUD $13,058 from non-Federal funds for the drawdowns after program grant expiration.

Implement adequate policies and procedures to ensure that payments to subrecipients are issued in accordance with HUD’s requirements.

Provide adequate training to staff associated with the administration of the ESG program to ensure compliance with HUD’s requirements, including timely drawdowns.

Implement adequate policies and procedures for conducting complete and consistent monitoring of subrecipients’ matching requirements, including confirming eligibility and existence of matching funds to ensure compliance with HUD’s requirements.

Acknowledge that $42,600,000 of the $65,000,000 in the attached settlement agreement represents an amount due HUD, less DOJ’s civil debt collection fees.

Acknowledge that $1,670,000 in the attached settlement represents an amount due HUD less DOJ’s civil debt collection fees.

Reimburse its program $373,860 ($302,638 in ineligible housing assistance payments $63,643 in associated administrative fees $7,579 in program funds paid to the contractor) from non-Federal funds for the inappropriate payments cited in this finding.

Seek retroactive approval or reimburse its program $358,237 ($339,908 in housing assistance payments $18,329 in program funds paid to the contractor) for the housing quality standards inspections of units owned by entities substantially controlled by the Authority, completed by contractors that were not approved by HUD.

Implement adequate procedures and controls to ensure that the Authority complies with HUD’s requirements for program conflicts of interest, including but not limited to ensuring that (1) its staff does not complete inspections for units owned by entities substantially controlled by the Authority, (2) its staff is appropriately trained and familiar with HUD’s requirements for units owned by entities it substantially controls, and (3) future…

Reimburse its program $163,316 from non-Federal funds ($29,074 in housing assistance due to calculation errors 74,957 due to inappropriate voucher sizes, payment standards, and utility allowances $18,141 $41,144 in administrative fees) for the inappropriate payments cited in this finding.

Reimburse the appropriate households $9,280 ($2,588 in housing assistance underpayments due to calculation errors $6,692 due to inappropriate voucher sizes, payment standards, and utility allowances) from program funds for the inappropriate underpayments cited in this finding.