Certified Divorce Lending Professional (CDLP)

Correct: Under HUD regulations (24 CFR 982.503), PHAs have the authority to establish payment standards between 90% and 110% of the Fair Market Rent (FMR). When market conditions in specific areas make the 110% cap insufficient to provide housing choice in high-opportunity neighborhoods, the PHA may request HUD approval for an exception payment standard. This allows the PHA to target higher subsidies to specific geographic areas where the FMR does not accurately reflect the local market, thereby promoting deconcentration and fair housing.

Incorrect: Increasing the payment standard to 125% for the entire jurisdiction without specific HUD authorization for an exception or Small Area FMR implementation exceeds the standard regulatory cap of 110%. Adjusting utility allowances downward to artificially inflate the available contract rent is an improper use of the utility schedule, which must be based on actual consumption estimates. Mandating that landlords accept a specific rent amount regardless of market value may violate program rules regarding rent reasonableness and could discourage landlord participation in the program.

Takeaway: PHAs can utilize exception payment standards above 110% of the FMR with HUD approval to facilitate voucher holder access to high-opportunity neighborhoods where market rents exceed standard benchmarks.

Correct: Under 24 CFR 982.404, a PHA must not make HAP payments for a unit that fails to meet HQS standards. The most effective control to prevent unauthorized payments is the integration of the inspection and financial systems. An automated interface ensures that as soon as a failure is logged, the payment is abated or held, removing the risk of human error or communication delays between the inspections department and the finance department.

Incorrect: Relying on landlord affidavits is insufficient because the PHA is legally responsible for verifying HQS compliance through its own inspections. Increasing inspection frequency addresses the detection of issues but does not solve the control failure regarding the cessation of payments once a failure is already known. A manual reconciliation of every file before every check run is administratively burdensome, inefficient, and highly susceptible to oversight compared to automated system controls.

Takeaway: To ensure regulatory compliance in HAP processing, PHAs should utilize automated system triggers that link inspection outcomes directly to the disbursement of funds.

Correct: In blended occupancy scenarios, the specialist must satisfy the requirements of all funding sources. When rules conflict, such as differing definitions of income or student eligibility, the most effective way to maintain compliance is to apply the more restrictive rule or ensure that the household meets the specific criteria of both programs independently. This prevents a situation where a household is eligible for one program but inadvertently violates the rules of the other.

Incorrect: Using only LIHTC standards or only HUD standards is incorrect because each program has unique statutory requirements that cannot be superseded by the other; ignoring one leads to non-compliance and potential loss of funding or tax credits. Creating a weighted average is not a legally or regulatorily recognized method for determining eligibility and would result in audit findings from both the IRS and HUD as it fails to meet the specific thresholds of either program.

Takeaway: Successful blended occupancy management requires the simultaneous application of all relevant program rules, often defaulting to the most restrictive standard to ensure multi-agency compliance.

Correct: A comparative aging analysis using immutable timestamps is the most objective audit procedure to identify disparate treatment. By comparing the time elapsed from request to completion across different subsidy types (HCV vs. LIHTC), the auditor can identify statistically significant patterns of delay that would substantiate the whistleblower’s claim of biased maintenance scheduling, which is a violation of Fair Housing and program compliance rules.

Incorrect: Reviewing the tenant selection plan is a test of design rather than a test of operating effectiveness; a policy may be compliant while the actual practice is discriminatory. Examining payroll records is an indirect measure that does not prove specific tenant groups were neglected. Verifying reasonable accommodation requests only addresses a specific subset of maintenance and does not provide a comprehensive view of general repair scheduling bias across the entire tenant population.

Takeaway: To detect disparate treatment in maintenance oversight, auditors should perform comparative aging analyses of work orders using system-generated timestamps to identify patterns of bias across different tenant assistance programs.

Correct: In blended occupancy environments, managers must navigate multiple regulatory frameworks. When filing claims for damages or unpaid rent, it is critical to meet the specific deadlines (such as HUD’s 180-day window for special claims) and documentation standards (like move-out inspections and ledgers) required by the subsidy provider. Simultaneously, these records must be preserved for LIHTC compliance, as state agencies may review these files to ensure the unit’s status and the owner’s efforts to mitigate losses were handled according to program rules.

Incorrect: Focusing only on the dollar amount ignores the strict regulatory windows that, if missed, result in a total forfeiture of the claim. Assuming PHA approval covers LIHTC requirements is a mistake because state agencies and HUD have different oversight mandates and documentation standards. Delaying claims until the annual recertification is incorrect because claim submission windows are typically triggered by the move-out date or the date the unit is ready for occupancy, not the tenant’s recertification schedule.

Takeaway: Effective claims management in blended occupancy requires synchronized adherence to the most restrictive reporting timelines and documentation standards across all applicable funding programs.

Correct: Under the Fair Housing Act and Section 504, a request for a reasonable accommodation does not need to be in writing or use specific legal language. Once a tenant makes a verbal request that communicates a need for a change due to a disability, the housing provider has a legal obligation to recognize it and engage in the interactive process. Documenting these requests immediately ensures the provider meets their regulatory duties and maintains an accurate audit trail for compliance monitoring.

Incorrect: Requiring written submissions or specific delivery methods like certified mail is incorrect because it creates unnecessary barriers that may violate Fair Housing protections for individuals with disabilities. Waiting for third-party verification before even recording the request is a failure of the interactive process, as the obligation to document and respond begins the moment the request is made. Standardizing documentation through mandatory briefings does not solve the underlying compliance failure of ignoring verbal requests.

Takeaway: Fair Housing regulations require housing providers to recognize and document verbal requests for reasonable accommodation to ensure the interactive process is initiated and program compliance is maintained.

Correct: For affordable housing properties, especially those constructed before 1978, lead-based paint and environmental hazards represent a massive liability risk. General liability insurance must provide coverage for these risks to protect the asset and the residents. Most LIHTC syndicators and HUD financing programs require that these specific risks be covered; excluding them leaves the owner exposed to catastrophic legal claims and constitutes a failure to maintain the standard of care required by program investors and regulators.

Incorrect: The lack of Law and Ordinance coverage is a risk for any older building regardless of flood zone status, as it covers the cost of bringing a building up to modern codes after a loss, but it is less critical than the immediate legal threat of lead-based paint claims. Workers’ compensation is indeed usually based on payroll, but the method of calculation is a standard operational issue rather than a specific ‘blended occupancy’ compliance failure. The Housing Choice Voucher program does not typically mandate specific deductible percentages for property owners; those are usually dictated by the lender or the tax credit investor.

Takeaway: Affordable housing compliance requires ensuring that general liability insurance specifically covers environmental hazards like lead-based paint in older properties to satisfy investor and HUD risk requirements.

Correct: HUD and the Privacy Act require that PII, such as Social Security numbers and income data used in HCV and LIHTC programs, be protected through encryption and strict access controls. Moving the data to a secure environment and applying role-based access controls (RBAC) ensures that only those with a ‘need to know’ can access the information, fulfilling the principle of least privilege and mitigating the risk of unauthorized disclosure.

Incorrect: Retaining data in an insecure environment for the sake of an audit trail is a violation of security best practices and increases the window of risk. Privacy waivers for infrastructure upgrades are not legally valid for bypassing federal PII protection requirements. While non-disclosure agreements provide a legal layer of protection, they do not address the technical failure of failing to encrypt data or restrict access to only those with a business necessity.

Takeaway: Data security and the principle of least privilege must be maintained during business continuity and system migrations to ensure the protection of sensitive tenant PII.

Correct: In a blended occupancy environment, providing services or access to amenities based on the source of a tenant’s rent subsidy (e.g., LIHTC vs. Section 8) constitutes disparate treatment. Under Fair Housing laws and HUD regulations, all residents in a development must have equal access to the benefits and services of the community. The auditor should identify this as a high-risk area for discrimination claims and recommend a policy of universal access to ensure compliance with civil rights requirements.

Incorrect: Focusing solely on LURA compliance or grant-specific commitments fails to address the overarching legal risk of Fair Housing violations. Implementing fees for one group of residents while providing free services to another based on their subsidy type is discriminatory and increases liability. Segregating logs or services to match funding streams does not mitigate the risk of discrimination; rather, it documents the disparate treatment, which could be used as evidence in a legal challenge.

Takeaway: Internal auditors must ensure that community engagement and tenant services in blended properties are administered uniformly to all residents to prevent Fair Housing violations related to disparate treatment.

Correct: Under Fair Housing regulations and the requirements for an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan (AFHMP), owners of blended occupancy properties must identify demographic groups that are ‘least likely to apply’ for the housing without special outreach. The correct approach involves proactive, targeted marketing to these specific groups through community organizations, houses of worship, and minority-focused media to ensure equal access and diversity in the applicant pool.

Incorrect: Relying exclusively on a PHA waiting list is insufficient because owners of blended properties (especially those with LIHTC) have independent affirmative marketing obligations. Focusing only on high-volume digital platforms may inadvertently exclude populations with limited internet access or those who rely on community-specific information sources. Restricting outreach to general-interest newspapers fails to meet the affirmative requirement to reach out to underrepresented groups, which is the core purpose of the AFHMP.

Takeaway: Effective outreach in blended occupancy requires proactive, targeted engagement with community organizations to reach populations identified as least likely to apply under the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan.