24 C.F.R. § 902.68 Technical review of results of PHAS Indicators #1 or #4.
Title 24 - Housing and Urban Development
(a) Request for technical reviews. This section describes the process for requesting and granting technical reviews of physical inspection results and resident survey results. (1) For both reviews, the burden of proof is on the PHA to show that an error occurred. (2) For both reviews, a request for technical review must be submitted in writing to the Director of the Real Estate Assessment Center and must be received by REAC no later than 15 days following the issuance of the applicable results to the PHA (either the physical inspection results or the resident survey results). The request must be accompanied by the PHA's reasonable evidence that an error occurred. (b) Technical review of physical inspection results. (1) For each property inspected, REAC will provide the results of the physical inspection and a score for that property to the PHA. If the PHA believes that an objectively verifiable and material error (or errors) occurred in the inspection of an individual property, the PHA may request a technical review of the inspection results for that property. (2) For a technical review of physical inspection results, the PHA's request must be accompanied by the PHA's evidence that an objectively verifiable and material error has occurred. The documentation submitted by the PHA may be photographic evidence, written material from an objective source, such as a local fire marshal or building code official, or other similar evidence. The evidence must be more than a disagreement with the inspector's observations, or the inspector's finding regarding the severity of the deficiency. (3) A technical review of a property's physical inspection will not be conducted based on conditions that were corrected subsequent to the inspection, nor will REAC consider a request for a technical review that is based on a challenge to the inspector's findings as to the severity of the deficiency (i.e., minor, major or severe). (4) Upon receipt of a PHA's request for technical review of a property's inspection results, REAC will review the PHA's file and any objectively verifiable evidence produced by the PHA. If REAC's review determines that an objectively verifiable and material error (or errors) has been documented, then REAC may take one or a combination of the following actions: (i) Undertake a new inspection; (ii) Correct the physical inspection report; (iii) Issue a corrected physical condition score; (iv) Issue a corrected PHAS score. (5) In determining whether a new inspection of the property is warranted and a new PHAS score must be issued, REAC will review the PHA's file and evidence submitted to determine whether the evidence supports that there may have been a significant contractor error in the inspection which results in a significant change from the property's original physical condition score and the PHAS designation assigned to the PHA (i.e., high performer, standard performer, or troubled performer). If REAC determines that a new inspection is warranted, and the new inspection results in a significant change from the original physical condition score, and the PHA's PHAS score and PHAS designation, REAC shall issue a new PHAS score to the PHA. (6) Material errors are the only grounds for technical review of physical inspection results. Material errors are those that exhibit specific characteristics and meet specific thresholds. The three types of material errors are: (i) Building data error. A building data error occurs if the inspection includes the wrong building or a building that was not owned by the PHA, including common or site areas that were not a part of the property. Incorrect building data that does not affect the score, such as the address, building name, year built, etc., would not be considered material, but is of great interest to HUD and will be corrected upon notice to REAC. (ii) Unit count error. A unit count error occurs if the total number of public housing units considered in scoring is incorrect. Since scoring uses total public housing units, REAC will examine instances where the participant can provide evidence that the total units used is incorrect. (iii) Non-existent deficiency error. A non-existent deficiency error occurs if the inspection cites a deficiency that does not exist. (7) A PHA's subsequent correction of deficiencies identified as a result of a property's physical inspection cannot serve as the basis for an appeal of the PHA's physical condition score. (c) Technical review of resident survey results. REAC will consider conducting a technical review of a PHA's resident survey results in cases where the contracted third party organization can be shown by the PHA to be in error. (1) The burden of proof rests with the PHA to provide objectively verifiable evidence that a technical error occurred. Examples include, but are not limited to, incorrect material being mailed to residents; or the PHA's units addresses were incorrect due to the third party organization's error, such as unit numbers being omitted from the addresses. A PHA that does not update its unit address list as described, above, will not be eligible for a technical review based on incorrect addresses. (2) Upon receipt of a PHA's request for technical review of resident survey results, REAC will review the PHA's file and evidence submitted by the PHA. If REAC's review determines that an error has been documented, REAC may take one or a combination of the following actions: (i) Undertake a new survey; (ii) Correct the resident survey results report; (iii) Issue a corrected resident services and satisfaction score; (iv) Issue a corrected PHAS score.
Title 24: Housing and Urban Development
PART 902—PUBLIC HOUSING ASSESSMENT SYSTEM
Subpart F—PHAS Scoring
§ 902.68 Technical review of results of PHAS Indicators #1 or #4.
