Finding Text
Criteria: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 2 CFR Part 200, Appendix XI sections 4-14.871-
16 and 4-14.871-17 states:
"The PHA must inspect the unit leased to a family at least annually to determine if the unit meets
Housing Quality Standards (HQS) and the PHA must conduct quality control re-inspections. The
PHA must prepare a unit inspection report (24 CFR sections 982.158(d) and 982.405(b)).
"For units under HAP contract that fail to meet HQS, the PHA must require the owner to correct
any life threatening HQS deficiencies within 24 hours after the inspections and all other HQS
deficiencies within 30 calendar days or within a specified PHA-approved extension. If the owner
does not correct the cited HQS deficiencies within the specified correction period, the PHA must
stop (abate) HAPs beginning no later than the first of the month following the specified correction
period or must terminate the HAP contract. The owner is not responsible for a breach of HQS as
or for tenant damage. For family-caused defects, if the family does not correct the cited HQS
deficiencies within the specified correction period, the PHA must take prompt and vigorous action
to enforce the family obligations (24 CFR sections 982.158(d) and 982.404)."
Condition: Our review identified six (6) re-inspections out of the total sixteen (16) that were performed
were completed after the required 30-day time period. Our review also identified one required inspection
for the year that had not been conducted.
Cause: The HQS re-inspections were not performed in a timely manner due to delays on the abated
status on the property or more focus on other urgent inspections. The high volume of requested
inspections and the shortage of staff during the audit examination period were also factors.
Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to perform re-inspections for HQS deficiencies that were recorded
during the annual inspection may result in grantor sanctions, potentially leading to a loss grant funding.
Questioned Cost: None
Context: Of the sixty (60) participant files reviewed, fifteen (15) required re-inspection. Of those 15, the
City failed to perform re-inspections for six (6) participants within the 30-day time period.
Repeat of a Prior-Year Finding: 2017-008, 2016-005, 2015-007, 2014-002, 2013-012