Federal Reports

We investigated allegations that a superintendent with the National Park Service (NPS) promoted his personal real estate business when performing official duties as a park superintendent.We found that the superintendent violated relevant standards of conduct and the Code of Federal Regulations by misusing public office for private gain and by creating an appearance that the Government endorsed the superintendent’s real estate business. We determined that the superintendent attended a board of directors meeting of an NPS partner group while in the official capacity as an NPS superintendent. According to a board member who attended the meeting, the superintendent, wearing an official NPS uniform, gave a member and other attendees his personal business card. The business card listed the superintendent as a real estate agent. The superintendent also used the NPS superintendent title on a personal Twitter account that promoted his real estate business.This is a summary of an investigative report we issued to the NPS regional director.

The Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Amendments Act of 1990 (Stewart B. McKinney Act) established the PATH program, which is administered at the Federal level by SAMHSA. SAMHSA awards PATH grants to States using a formula. States use the grants to fund local public and nonprofit organizations, known as PATH providers. The PATH program supports outreach and other services to individuals with serious mental illnesses and substance use disorders who are homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless. To be eligible for PATH program services, individuals must be age 18 and older, suffering from serious mental illnesses, and homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless. (We refer to these individuals as “consumers” throughout the report.) SAMHSA requires States, as part of their application for PATH funds, to develop their own operational definitions of the terms “homeless individual,” “imminent risk of becoming homeless,” and “serious mental illness.”States awarded PATH funds must enter into formal written agreements with grant subrecipients that address PATH program requirements. Further, States must meet cost-sharing obligations for non-Federal contributions towards their PATH programs. Additionally, at the end of each grant period, grantees are required to submit to SAMHSA a Statewide Annual PATH Report that details their PATH program activities. Finally, States must complete a financial closeout of their PATH grants to determine if PATH program costs were allowable, properly allocated, or if any unused funds should have been returned to the Federal Government. As part of the financial closeout process, States must file a final Federal Financial Report (FFR) that details the amount of Federal and non-Federal costs incurred on their PATH grants (45 CFR § 75.381(a)).New York’s PATH program is administered at the State level by its Office of Mental Health (OMH). For the grant period we reviewed, SAMHSA awarded New York $4.2 million in PATH grant funds, which OMH distributed to 8 counties. These 8 counties contracted with a total of 20 non-profit organizations and local governments to provide PATH services to 4,126 enrolled consumers. In addition to PATH grant funds, these providers received financial assistance from Federal, State, and local government agencies to fund their various programs. OMH requires counties and PATH providers to submit consolidated fiscal reports that include the costs and claiming schedules for all OMH-administered programs they operate, including the PATH program

In accordance with the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, as amended, we are required to annually audit the consolidated financial statements of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Our objective was to express an opinion on the fair presentation of HUD’s consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles applicable to the Federal Government. This report presents our independent auditor’s report on HUD’s fiscal year 2020 consolidated financial statements and reports on internal control over financial reporting and compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. HUD reports our opinion on its financial statements in its Fiscal Year 2020 Agency Financial Report.As part of auditing HUD’s consolidated financial statements, we are also responsible for auditing the financial statements of HUD’s two component entities, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae). Audit results on these entities are presented in Audit Reports 2021-FO-0001 and 2021-FO-0002, respectively.In our opinion, HUD’s fiscal year 2020 financial statements were presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with the U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for the Federal Government. However, we identified deficiencies that constituted one material weakness and one instance of noncompliance with applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. Specifically, HUD had weaknesses in its controls over financial reporting and did not always comply with Federal generally accepted accounting principles. HUD also did not comply with the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act, regarding certain requirements to establish and maintain financial management systems.This report contains a number of current recommendations for corrective actions addressed to the Offices of the Chief Financial Officer, Community Planning and Development, Housing – Federal Housing Administration, and Public and Indian Housing. The Followup on Prior Audits section contains outstanding prior-year recommendations. Most significant are those recommendations related to properly accounting for certain funding provided to HUD under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act and improving and better documenting HUD’s estimation and validation methodologies for accrued grant liabilities. Additionalrecommendations specific to FHA and Ginnie Mae are in separate reports identified above.

An Amtrak signal maintainer based in Chicago, Illinois, was terminated from employment on December 3, 2020, following his administrative hearing. Our investigation found that the former employee violated company policy by leaving during his work shifts to drive for a rideshare company. We also found that he routinely sat in his car during his work shifts for extended periods of time. During his interview, he admitted to leaving during his work shift to drive for the rideshare company, including when he was scheduled and paid to work overtime.

See the additional details link below for the full report, report summary, multimedia or any agency follow-up.