| HOME Investment Partnerships Program |
Housing lacks adequate internal controls over the accuracy and completeness of the data it includes in its Section 3 Summary Report. |
2007-08 |
| Fully corrected. Housing has developed a report of all subrecipients that received funding for activities subject to Section 3 requirements, and ensured that Section 3 reports were received for all such subrecipients. Housing also contacted a 10 percent sample of those reporting zero Section 3 activity to ensure that their report is accurate. |
60 |
| Community Development Block Grants/State's Program |
Housing has taken partial corrective action to address the prior year’s finding and did not complete an adequate number of monitoring site visits. Housing indicated that it would complete 16 site visits for Economic Development projects and another 24 site visits for general projects during 2010. We reviewed Housing's site-visit tracking log, we noted that it had completed three site visits of general projects and 13 site visits of Economic Development projects. We also noted that these site visits were not always focused on projects identified by Housing as having the highest risk. For example, of the four general Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projects with the highest risk score, Housing did not complete any site visits. |
2008-09 |
| Partially corrected. The CDBG Section has created a Monitoring Unit, which has begun the process of creating a risk assessment tool, a monitoring procedure, and a monitoring plan. The Monitoring Unit has begun addressing the backlog of reports that have either not gone out or are not cleared. However, the Monitoring Unit has been unable to hire any staff to complete CDBG required monitoring visits due to State’s hiring freeze. Even so, it is still impossible to complete his correction action on schedule. Staff in the Monitoring Unit have been trained to enter data into Consolidated Automated Program Enterprise System (CAPES) correctly and have addressed all past entry problems. |
62 |
