REAC Could Improve Its Inspections Processes and Controls
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for REAC require REAC to ensure that the nine contract inspectors, who did not meet the minimum requirements to begin the training, receive specialized training in residential or commercial building for electrical; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning; masonry; plumbing; and carpentry, as applicable.
REAC Could Improve Its Inspections Processes and Controls
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for REAC require REAC to develop, use, and document an electronic checklist for each contract inspector’s file to ensure that inspectors (1) obtain and maintain the required insurance, and (2) have approved background checks before conducting inspections. In addition, support that the three sampled inspectors meet the minimum insurance limits for the current effective periods.
REAC Could Improve Its Inspections Processes and Controls
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for REAC require REAC to execute administrative action related to outside standards determinations for five inspectors.
REAC Could Improve Its Inspections Processes and Controls
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for REAC require REAC to develop and implement processes and procedures, in accordance with its system security plan and the HUD Handbook, Information Technology Security Policy, to ensure that annual assessments and continuous monitoring of the security controls are performed and that security control failures are prevented and corrected when identified.
REAC Could Improve Its Inspections Processes and Controls
We recommend that the Deputy Assistant Secretary for REAC require REAC to establish and implement written processes and procedures to verify the accuracy of the unit numbers sampled and entered for inspection by the inspector, which could include requiring (1) inspectors to upload a picture of the rent roll to the data collection device, (2) housing agencies to maintain a copy of the rent roll used, and (3) inspectors and public housing…
Louis Manor Apartments, Port Arthur, TX, Multifamily Section 8 Program, Subsidized Unsupported Tenants and Uninspected Units
We recommend that the Southwest Region Director of Multifamily Housing require the Louis Manor Apartments’ owner to support that the subsidies for 14 tenants with missing income verifications, income discrepancies, incorrect annual income, and missing annual certifications were adequately supported and accurate or repay HUD $268,452 for those subsidies. Repayment must be from nonproject funds.
HUD's Improper Approvals Resulted in Invalid Exemptions and an Ineligible Capital Funds Expenditure for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority
Ensure that $1,385,791 ($1,229,684 in housing assistance payments and $156,107 in associated administrative fees) used by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority is supported through a valid and retroactive exemption from HUD’s third-party requirements. If a retroactive exemption cannot be issued, HUD should follow recovery procedures prescribed in HUD Handbook 2000.06, REV-4.
HUD's Improper Approvals Resulted in Invalid Exemptions and an Ineligible Capital Funds Expenditure for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority
Revise the standard MTW agreement for all existing 39 MTW housing agencies to clearly and specifically support which provision(s) waive the third-party inspection requirements.
HUD's Improper Approvals Resulted in Invalid Exemptions and an Ineligible Capital Funds Expenditure for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority
Issue clarifying guidance to all existing 39 MTW housing agencies advising that HUD intended to waive the third-party inspection requirements via attachment C to the standard agreement.
HUD's Improper Approvals Resulted in Invalid Exemptions and an Ineligible Capital Funds Expenditure for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority
Ensure that reviews of MTW annual plans are thorough by verifying that the MTW plan accurately identifies the appropriate exemptions as authorized in the MTW agreements.
HUD's Improper Approvals Resulted in Invalid Exemptions and an Ineligible Capital Funds Expenditure for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority
Verify that the Office of Public Housing Investments’ approvals of all MTW public housing agencies’ MTW plans’ exemptions from HUD’s third-party requirements were valid and appropriate.
HUD's Improper Approvals Resulted in Invalid Exemptions and an Ineligible Capital Funds Expenditure for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority
Require the Authority to reimburse its Public Housing Capital Fund program $38,411 from nonproject funds for the inappropriate use of funds for the Section 8 Project-Based Voucher Program units.
HUD's Improper Approvals Resulted in Invalid Exemptions and an Ineligible Capital Funds Expenditure for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority
Ensure that the Louisville, KY, PIH field office sends to the Office of Recapitalization any requests it receives for approving capital funds expenditures after the RAD conversion is complete.
HUD's Improper Approvals Resulted in Invalid Exemptions and an Ineligible Capital Funds Expenditure for the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority
Require the Authority to ensure that capital funds are used in accordance with the program requirements for any future RAD conversions.
The City of Hattiesburg, MS, Did Not Always Administer Its HOME Investment Partnerships Program in Accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
Require the City to support $441,202 ($370,729 $20,000 $50,473) or reimburse its program from non-Federal funds for commitments and expenditures not adequately supported.
The City of Hattiesburg, MS, Did Not Always Administer Its HOME Investment Partnerships Program in Accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
Require the City to reimburse its program $33,258 from non-Federal funds for inappropriate costs incurred before the written agreements were executed.
The City of Hattiesburg, MS, Did Not Always Administer Its HOME Investment Partnerships Program in Accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
Recapture and thereby put $32,019 to better use, which the City did not commit by its 24-month statutory commitment deadline in fiscal year 2015 funding for activity 1464.
The City of Hattiesburg, MS, Did Not Always Administer Its HOME Investment Partnerships Program in Accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
Require the City to develop and implement HOME procedures, including training for the City’s employees, to ensure that (1) commitments are accurately entered into IDIS to maintain data integrity and (2) the HOME program is administered in accordance with HUD’s and its own requirements.
The City of Hattiesburg, MS, Did Not Always Administer Its HOME Investment Partnerships Program in Accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
Verify that the remaining 14 (Footnote 5 - As detailed in the Scope and Methodology section of this report, we reviewed 23 of the 37 commitments entered into IDIS by the City.) commitments made during the period January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2017, were properly supported with written agreements and accurately entered into IDIS.
The City of Hattiesburg, MS, Did Not Always Administer Its HOME Investment Partnerships Program in Accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
Require the City to follow its newly developed policy regarding the execution of a written agreement that is signed and dated by all parties before the commitment of any funds in IDIS.