Recommendations

Open Recommendations by Oversight Area

Housing Assistance

Community Development

Disaster Recovery

Financial Risk and Accountability

Technology and Cybersecurity

Health and Safety

HUD's Operations

Priority Recommendations
Open Recommendations

View data table

Open Recommendations by Oversight Area
Oversight Area	Priority Recommendations	Open Recommendations
Housing Assistance	75	100
Community Development	3	75
Disaster Recovery	3	82
Financial Risk and Accountability	6	130
Technology and Cybersecurity	4	88
Health and Safety	1	53
HUD's Operations	4	100
Total	96	628

Filter search results using the following criteria

399 Results

Clear

We audited Laurentian Hall Apartments (project) because of its failure to submit financial statements in a timely manner and because we had never audited the project before. Our audit objective was to determine whether the project’s owner managed the project in accordance with its U.S. Department…

Pay the project $282,578 from non-project funds for the fair value of the commercial rent not collected from the lessees.

Request approval from HUD to lease the commercial space. If HUD approves the request, then execute a lease at fair market rent thereby increasing the project’s rent revenue by at least $36,858 per year.

Request approval from HUD for the $31,769 in project operating funds spent on building improvements or repay the project from nonproject funds for any amount not approved.

Provide documentation to show that the $39,920 paid to replace an air conditioning system was fair and reasonable or repay the project from nonproject funds any amount determined not to be fair and reasonable (excluding any amount repaid as a result of recommendation 1C).

Remove the $25,000 lien on the project property.

Repay the project $8,597 from nonproject funds for the ineligible expenses it incurred for management fee and gas utility expenses that were identified by the audit and any additional management fee and gas utility expenses improperly paid outside of our review period.

Develop and implement controls to ensure that financial statements are submitted to HUD in a timely manner, including paying the correct amount of annual payments according to the terms of the mortgage.

Develop and implement controls to ensure that the project complies with applicable HUD requirements.

Recalculate the project’s annual surplus cash balances for 2013, 2014, and 2015 after resolution of recommendations 1A, 1C, 1D, and 1F to determine whether the project should make additional payment to HUD from surplus cash toward its mortgage beyond the $13,740 that it paid during the audit.

Provide training and technical assistance to the owner and its management agent to ensure compliance with the terms of its mortgage and other applicable HUD requirements.

We audited the St. Tammany Parish grants department’s administration of its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) disaster recovery program, as part of our annual audit plan to review the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 funds. Our objective was to determine whether the Parish…

Oversight Area: Disaster Relief

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to develop and implement a HUD approved written plan and checklists; and take actions that will correct and prevent the deficiencies outlined in the finding, improve program administration effectiveness, ensure compliance with HUD regulations and the policies and procedures it submitted and certified to HUD, and ensure it has the continuing capacity to carry out its activities, as required. Implementing this recommendation should ensure that the remaining $8,679,994 allocated in disaster funding is better used.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to support the cost reasonableness or repay its program from non-Federal funds $362,319 paid to its consultant contractor without an independent cost estimate.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to support the cost reasonableness or repay its program from non-Federal funds $30,702 paid to its construction contractor for cost increases without adequate cost analyses.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to support the cost reasonableness or repay its program from non-Federal funds $58,873 paid to its surveyor contractor for the sole-sourced contract without an adequate cost analysis.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to maintain program files with all required documentation for each activity.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to implement an internal audit function that satisfies program requirements.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to revise its monitoring policy to include the role of the internal auditor once implemented, and finalize and fully implement or revise its fraud, waste, and abuse detection policy to reflect current procedures.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to update its Web site to include current quarterly performance, budget, and progress reports.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s New Orleans Office of Community Planning and Development require the Parish to obtain technical assistance concerning the disaster recovery program requirements, including related Federal Register requirements. Specifically, the technical assistance should include guidance on how to satisfy the requirement regarding maintaining an internal audit function and Web site maintenance.

We audited Clark County, NV’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. We selected Clark County for review due to its large grant size and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) risk assessment. The reporting objective of the audit was to determine whether Clark…

Oversight Area: Community Improvement

Support the reasonableness of the amount paid for the food facility consolidation and expansion project or repay the program $1,663,758 from non-Federal funds.

Correct any citations from the Southern Nevada Health District at the Pettiti public pool before May 2017 using non-Federal funds or repay the entire project cost of $596,126 from non-Federal funds and support the reasonableness of the change orders for the Pettiti pool project or repay the program from non-Federal funds.

Support the cost reasonableness of $2,809 in change orders for the ADA pool improvement project or repay the program from non-Federal funds.

Provide supporting documentation for $4,955 in unsupported costs or repay the program from non-Federal funds.

Provide support showing that the ADA pool improvement project allows equal and independent access for people with disabilities through a third party or correct the access issue.

Develop and implement procurement policies and procedures for monitoring subrecipients to ensure that the scope of work developed by its subrecipients is sufficiently detailed to allow contractors to submit informed bids, reducing the number of change orders after the contract, and that its subrecipients do an independent cost analysis before all procurement transactions, including change orders, to ensure that it receives a reasonable price and allows for full and open competition.

Develop and implement policies and procedures that ensure labor wage interviews are completed and documented.

Provide training to its staff on CDBG program rules and requirements to ensure that its staff adequately implements policies and procedures.

Identify the national objective met for the park project or repay the program $2,000,000 from non-Federal funds.

Develop monitoring practices to ensure that all projects that use limited clientele criteria exclusively serve the specific population claimed.

Repay $48,323 to the program from non-Federal funds for non-program-related payroll costs.

Determine the allocable amount of CDBG payroll costs for the employees who worked on CDBG and non-CDBG activities and adjust the funding amount as necessary or repay the program $573,064 from non-Federal funds.

Repay $71,397 to the program from non-Federal funds for the use of CDBG funds for code enforcement costs related to general government expenses.

Revise its code enforcement program to meet CDBG requirements for the remaining $33,603 budgeted or amend the use of the funding to another CDBG-eligible activity.

Determine the CDBG proportional benefit of the $329 charged for indirect automotive costs and repay the program any unsupported charges using non-Federal funds.

Obtain training or technical assistance from HUD concerning CDBG code enforcement, allocation of payroll, and indirect administrative costs.

We audited Health Concepts Ltd., a management agent that administers six Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured nursing homes. We conducted this audit based on our review of the Pine Grove Health Center. The review found that Pine Grove’s owners paid salaries for onsite staff that were…

Oversight Area: Healthcare Programs

Develop and implement adequate controls over payments for services that are part of the management fee.

Amend and resubmit the management agreements and the management certifications for HUD approval and ensure that the agreements do not conflict with the management certifications.

Identify all unallowable fees and reimburse from non-project funds.

We audited the Hammond Housing Authority as part of our annual audit plan to review public housing programs. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority properly administered its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program in accordance…

Repay its program from non-Federal funds $4,191 for ineligible housing subsidy overpayments.

Support the eligibility of the participant or reimburse its program $6,720 from non-Federal funds for housing subsidy payments.

Support that it properly used the funds collected or repay its program $23,463 from non-Federal funds.

Develop and implement controls to identify errors and ensure that housing assistance payments are correctly calculated and paid, leases run concurrently with the housing assistance payments contract, required eligibility documentation is maintained, rent reasonableness is completed before executing the housing assistance payments contract and lease, the correct utility allowance rate is used, and documentation to support completed background checks is maintained.

Revise its written policies and procedures to ensure that it administers its participant repayment agreements in compliance with requirements.

Ensure that it executes form HUD-52675 with all program participants and adult household members.

Develop written policies and procedures, to include HUD’s requirements to (1) properly report participant data in the PIC system, (2) report repayments and debts owed in the EIV system, and (3) monitor EIV reports.

Compare current participant and financial data to the EIV and PIC system data to ensure that all participant data were accurately submitted and reported.

Revise its administrative plan to ensure that it accurately reflects current HUD requirements and the Authority’s current policies and procedures.

Provide training to its staff to ensure that it is familiar with all HUD documentation and reporting requirements.

In coordination with our Office of Investigations, we audited the Housing Authority of the City of Jasper, TX, because we received a complaint. The complainant’s allegations included the executive director’s misuse of Authority vehicles and other issues. Our audit objective was to determine…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

Repay from nonfederal funds $27,818 to its Capital Funds program from non-Federal funds for the ineligible purchase of the truck and expenditure of 2013 funds before they were available.

Repay from nonfederal funds its HUD programs $7,446 for the executive director’s personal use of the Authority’s equipment, and amend the executive director’s prior Internal Revenue Forms W-2 to include the annual personal use of $5,888 as income.

Repay from nonfederal funds its HUD programs $4,739 paid to its fee accountant, which had a conflict of interest with the executive director.

Repay from nonfederal funds its HUD programs $1,273 lost on the conflict of interest sale of the Authority’s vehicle to the executive director’s daughter.

Repay from nonfederal funds its HUD programs $1,034 for ineligible charges on the Authority’s credit cards.

Support or repay from nonfederal funds its HUD programs $652 for unsupported charges on the Authority’s credit card.

Repay from nonfederal funds its HUD programs $4,000 paid for an ineligible 2011 training conference.

Provide support for the reasonableness of the unit repairs costs totaling $44,994 and repay from nonfederal funds any unsupported or unreasonable amount.

Provide training for the Authority’s commissioners on their responsibilities and duties.

Require the Authority to update its policies and procedures so that they contain current Federal guidance.

We recommend that the Director, Departmental Enforcement Center take appropriate administrative sanctions, including suspension, limited denial of participation, or debarment against the executive director.

We recommend that the Director, Departmental Enforcement Center seek civil money penalties, as appropriate, against the executive director.

We recommend that the Associate General Counsel for Program Enforcement determine legal sufficiency and, if legally sufficient, pursue remedies under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act against the executive director.

Provide technical assistance to the Mayor and the board concerning their responsibilities regarding the Authority.

Monitor the Authority to ensure it is holding its board meetings, as required by its bylaws.

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Community Planning and Development’s (CPD) Section 108 Loan Guarantees program. We conducted the audit as part of our annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether HUD had adequate oversight of…

Oversight Area: Community Improvement

Reevaluate the feasibility of the two Section 108 activities that failed to meet a national objective and determine the eligibility of the $15,814,000 already invested. Any amount determined ineligible must be reimbursed to the program from non-Federal funds.

Require the borrowers to submit a plan for how they will proceed and use the $8,694,000 million in unused commitments to provide the intended benefits and meet program objectives.

Require the borrower to provide all supporting documentation and evaluate the allowability and eligibility of $75,000 used for the unauthorized activity. Any amount determined ineligible must be reimbursed to the program from non-Federal funds.

Develop procedures directing field offices to include the review of Section 108-funded activities when performing the annual reviews of Block Grant recipients.

Develop procedures to ensure that the information necessary to monitor program performance and compliance with program requirements is promptly provided to the field offices.

Implement procedures to ensure that borrowers comply with all loan contract provisions and that required documents are submitted, including bank agreements, monthly statements, and security documents. If a borrower does not provide evidence that it has complied with all program requirements, HUD must initiate appropriate remedial actions under paragraph 12 of the contract.

Develop and implement a tracking system for monitoring reviews of Section 108 loans.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded the Miami-Dade NSP Consortium more than $89.3 million in Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) 2 funds. We audited two of the consortium members, Neighborhood Housing Services of South Florida, the lead member, and the Urban…

Reimburse NSP2 from non-Federal funds for the $59,523 in ineligible disbursements on the five vouchers.

Provide documentation to support that the $224,868 in NSP2 funds drawn down from the four vouchers was eligible or repay the program from non-Federal funds.

Provide documentation to support that the differences resulting from the payroll costs for the three vouchers, which netted $3,169, were offset in later drawdown vouchers or repay the program from non-Federal funds.

Review all administration drawdown vouchers and provide documentation to support that the drawdowns for estimated payroll costs are reconciled with the actual payroll costs for the pay periods. Any calculated overpayment by NSP should be returned to the program to meet program purposes.

We audited the Inglewood Housing Authority (Authority) based upon issues with participant eligibility identified during our previous review of the financial operations of the Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program, audit report 2016-LA-1013. Our audit objective was to determine whether the…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

Reimburse its program $648 from non-Federal funds and use its internal control procedures to ensure that housing assistance payments are correctly calculated during the certification process to ensure that a $648 overpayment in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.

Reimburse the participants $84 from non-Federal funds for the underpayment of housing assistance.

Develop and implement an internal policy and procedure related to interim certifications to ensure that it obtains EIV reports and maintains those reports in participant files.

Develop and implement controls to minimize instances of overpayment and underpayment of housing assistance.

This report presents the results of our audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) fiscal year 2016 compliance with the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 (IPERA). For the fourth consecutive fiscal year, we determined that HUD did not comply with…

Ensure that all payments to Federal employees are included in HUD’s periodic risk assessment cycle.

Establish and implement procedures and controls, in coordination with FHA, to ensure that FHA information reported in the AFR is accurate and consistent with supporting documents.

Develop and implement steps to ensure that the description of corrective actions highlights current efforts and key milestones for ongoing efforts and explain in the AFR how it specifically tailored its corrective actions to better reflect the unique processes, procedures, and risks involved with RHAP as required by OMB.

Develop and implement steps to ensure that adequate disclosures are made when future-year reduction targets for improper payments reported in the AFR are higher than the current-year improper payment estimates.

Disclose in the AFR the results of HUD’s review concerning its current performance against program-specific improper payment reduction targets to promote transparency.

Open Recommendations by Oversight Area

Oversight Area

Status

Priority

The Owner of Laurentian Hall Apartments, Pittsburgh, PA, Did Not Always Manage Its HUD-Mortgaged Project in Accordance With HUD Requirements

St. Tammany Parish, Mandeville LA, Did Not Always Administer Its CDBG Disaster Recovery Grant in Accordance With HUD Requirements or as Certified

Clark County, NV, Did Not Always Use Community Development Block Grant Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements

Health Concepts Ltd’s., Providence, RI Service Charges at FHA-Insured Nursing Homes Did Not Always Comply With Management Agreements.

The Hammond Housing Authority’s, Hammond, LA, Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Had Weaknesses

The Housing Authority of the City of Jasper, TX, Did Not Operate Its Public Housing Programs in Compliance With HUD’s Requirements

HUD’s Oversight of Section 108 Loans Was Not Adequate To Ensure Compliance With Program Requirements

Neighborhood Housing Services of South Florida, Miami, FL Did Not Ensure That NSP2 Funds Were Used for Eligible Purposes and Sufficiently Supported

The Inglewood Housing Authority, Inglewood, CA, Generally Ensured the Eligibility of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Participants

Fiscal Year 2016 Audit of HUD’s Compliance with the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act

Stay Informed