Recurring Findings

Housing and Community Development: Recurring Significant Internal Control Deficiencies
Federal Program Issue First Year Reported
Department's Assertion Page Number
Community Development Block Grants/State's Program Housing lacks adequate internal controls to ensure the completeness of the Section 3 report that it submits to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The computer-generated report Housing uses as the basis for its Section 3 Summary Report to HUD is not an effective control. 2007-08
According to Housing, corrective action is complete. However, the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program will continue to improve the Section 3 tracking report to ensure it covers all potential contracts that it is required to report. 80
HOME Investment Partnerships Program Housing lacks adequate internal controls to ensure that all subrecipients who were required to report Section 3 Summary Report information actually do so. 2007-08
Housing will identify its subrecipients required to provide Section 3 information and complete its testing by April 29, 2011. 83
Community Development Block Grants/State's Program Housing did not complete an adequate number of monitoring site visits to provide adequate oversight of its subrecipients. 2008-09
The CDBG Section will continue to improve its monitoring process. Beginning June 30, 2011, CDBG will complete a risk?based review of all active jurisdictions (those who have active contracts) by December 30 of each year to determine the 15 highest risk jurisdictions and monitor them. This will be the basis for the monitoring schedule created each year. Staff will be trained each year on the risk factors, the monitoring process, and correct data entry procedures for inputting monitoring data into Housing’s tracking system. 86
HOME Investment Partnerships Program Housing fell short of its goal to monitor 40 state recipients of HOME program funds, and in selecting which state recipients it monitored, it did not consistently choose those that it had determined to be at greatest risk for noncompliance. In addition, Housing has not issued letters notifying state recipients of the results of the reviews that were performed. 2008-09
By June 30, 2011, Housing will send letters to grantees for monitoring done in calendar year 2010. By June 30, 2011, Housing will perform a risk assessment on all state recipients that have had significant activity and develop a plan to monitor the 20 highest risk state recipients. By December 31, 2011, Housing will conduct on-site monitoring of these 20 highest-risk state recipients and send letters containing findings and concerns to the state recipients within 30 days of the monitoring visit. 77
HOME Investment Partnerships Program Housing fell short of its goal to monitor 40 state recipients of HOME program funds, and in selecting which state recipients it monitored, it did not consistently choose those that it had determined to be at greatest risk for noncompliance. In addition, Housing has not issued letters notifying state recipients of the results of the reviews that were performed. 2008-09
By June 30, 2011, Housing will send letters to grantees for monitoring done in calendar year 2010. By June 30, 2011, Housing will perform a risk assessment on all state recipients that have had significant activity and develop a plan to monitor the 20 highest risk state recipients. By December 31, 2011, Housing will conduct on-site monitoring of these 20 highest-risk state recipients and send letters containing findings and concerns to the state recipients within 30 days of the monitoring visit. 77
© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader