Prohibition of Advance Disclosure of Funding Decisions

24 C.F.R. Part ..., Subpart B
in effectEffective: 2024-07-01

24 C.F.R. § 4.20 Purpose.

The provisions of this subpart B are authorized under section 103 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (Pub. L. 101-235, approved December 15, 1989) (42 U.S.C. 3537a) (hereinafter, Section 103). Both the provisions of Section 103 and this subpart B apply for the purposes of Section 103. Section 103 proscribes direct or indirect communication of certain information during the selection process by HUD employees to persons within or outside of the Department who are not authorized to receive that information. The purpose of the proscription is to preclude giving an unfair advantage to applicants who would receive information not available to other applicants or to the public. Section 103 also authorizes the Department to impose a civil money penalty on a HUD employee who knowingly discloses protected information, if such a violation of Section 103 is material, and authorizes the Department to sanction the person who received information improperly by, among other things, denying assistance to that person.

24 C.F.R. § 4.22 Definitions.

Application means a written request for assistance regardless of whether the request is in proper form or format. Assistance does not include any contract (e.g., a procurement contract) that is subject to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) (48 CFR ch. 1). Disclose means providing information directly or indirectly to a person through any means of communication. Employee includes persons employed on a full-time, part-time, or temporary basis, and special government employees as defined in 18 U.S.C. 202. The term applies whether or not the employee is denoted as an officer of the Department. “Employee” is to be construed broadly to include persons who are retained on a contractual or consultative basis under an Office of Human Resources appointment. However, “employee” does not include an independent contractor, e.g., a firm or individual working under the authority of a procurement contract. Material or materially means in some influential or substantial respect or having to do more with substance than with form. Person means an individual, corporation, company, association, authority, firm, partnership, society, State, local government, or any other organization or group of people. Selection process means the period with respect to a selection for assistance that begins when the HUD official responsible for awarding the assistance involved, or his or her designee, makes a written request (which includes the selection criteria to be used in providing the assistance) to the Office of General Counsel (OGC) to prepare the NOFA, solicitation, or request for applications for assistance for publication in the Federal Register. The period includes the evaluation of applications, and concludes with the announcement of the selection of recipients of assistance.

24 C.F.R. § 4.24 Scope.

(a) Coverage. The prohibitions against improper disclosure of covered selection information apply to any person who is an employee of the Department. In addition, the Department will require any other person who participates at the invitation of the Department in the selection process to sign a certification that he or she will be bound by the provisions of this part. (b) Applicability. The prohibitions contained in this part apply to conduct occurring on or after June 12, 1991.

24 C.F.R. § 4.26 Permissible and impermissible disclosures.

(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 103, an employee is permitted to disclose information during the selection process with respect to: (1) The requirements of a HUD program or programs, including unpublished policy statements and the provision of technical assistance concerning program requirements, provided that the requirements or statements are disclosed on a uniform basis to any applicant or potential applicant. For purposes of this part, the term “technical assistance” includes such activities as explaining and responding to questions about program regulations, defining terms in an application package, and providing other forms of technical guidance that may be described in a NOFA. The term “technical assistance” also includes identification of those parts of an application that need substantive improvement, but this term does not include advising the applicant how to make those improvements. (2) The dates by which particular decisions in the selection process will be made; (3) Any information which has been published in the Federal Register in a NOFA or otherwise; (4) Any information which has been made public through means other than the Federal Register; (5) An official audit, inquiry or investigation, if the disclosure is made to an auditor or investigator authorized by the HUD Inspector General to conduct the audit or investigation; (6) Legal activities, including litigation, if the disclosure is made to an attorney who is representing or is otherwise responsible to the Department in connection with the activities; or (7) Procedures that are required to be performed to process an application, e.g., environmental or budget reviews, and technical assistance from experts in fields who are regularly employed by other government agencies, provided that the agency with which the expert is employed or associated is not an applicant for HUD assistance during the pending funding cycle. (b) An authorized employee, during the selection process, may contact an applicant for the purpose of: (1) Communication of the applicant's failure to qualify, after a preliminary review for eligibility and completeness with respect to his or her application, and the reasons for the failure to qualify, or the fact of the applicant's failure to be determined to be technically acceptable after a full review; or (2) Clarification of the terms of the applicant's application. A clarification, for the purpose of this paragraph (b), may include a request for additional information consistent with regulatory requirements. (c) Prohibition of advance disclosure of funding decisions. During the selection process an employee shall not knowingly disclose any covered selection information regarding the selection process to any person other than an employee authorized to receive that information. (1) The following disclosures of information are, at any time during the selection process, a violation of Section 103: (i) Information regarding any applicant's relative standing; (ii) The amount of assistance requested by any applicant; (iii) Any information contained in an application; (2) The following disclosures of information, before the deadline for the submission of applications, shall be a violation of Section 103: (i) The identity of any applicant; and (ii) The number of applicants.

24 C.F.R. § 4.28 Civil penalties.

Whenever any employee knowingly and materially violates the prohibition in Section 103, the Department may impose a civil money penalty on the employee in accordance with the provisions of 24 CFR part 30.

24 C.F.R. § 4.30 Procedure upon discovery of a violation.

(a) In general. When an alleged violation of Section 103 or this subpart B comes to the attention of any person, including an employee, he or she may either: (1) Contact the HUD Ethics Law Division to provide information about the alleged violation; or (2) Contact the HUD Office of Inspector General to request an inquiry or investigation into the matter. (b) Ethics Law Division. When the Ethics Law Division receives information concerning an alleged violation of Section 103, it shall refer the matter to the Inspector General stating the facts of the alleged violation and requesting that the Inspector General make an inquiry or investigation into the matter. (c) Inspector General. When the Inspector General receives information concerning an alleged violation of Section 103 or this subpart B, he or she shall notify the Ethics Law Division when the Inspector General begins an inquiry or investigation into the matter. (d) Protection of employee complainants. (1) No official of the Ethics Law Division, after receipt of information from an employee stating the facts of an alleged violation of this part, shall disclose the identity of the employee without the consent of that employee. The Inspector General, after receipt of information stating the facts of an alleged violation of this part, shall not disclose the identity of the employee who provided the information without the consent of that employee, unless the Inspector General determines that disclosure of the employee's identity is unavoidable during the course of an investigation. However, any employee who knowingly reports a false alleged violation of this part is not so protected and may be subject to disciplinary action. (2) Any employee who has authority to take, direct others to take, recommend or approve a personnel action is prohibited from threatening, taking, failing to take, recommending, or approving any personnel action as reprisal against another employee for providing information to investigating officials.

24 C.F.R. § 4.32 Investigation by Office of Inspector General.

The Office of Inspector General shall review every alleged violation of Section 103. If after a review the Office of Inspector General determines that further investigation is not warranted, it shall notify the Ethics Law Division of that determination. If, after a review, the Office of Inspector General determines that additional investigation is warranted, it shall conduct the investigation and upon completion issue a report of the investigation to the Ethics Law Division as to each alleged violation.

24 C.F.R. § 4.34 Review of Inspector General's report by the Ethics Law Division.

After receipt of the Inspector General's report, the Ethics Law Division shall review the facts and circumstances of the alleged violations. In addition, the Ethics Law Division may: (a) Return the report to the Inspector General with a request for further investigation; (b) Discuss the violation with the employee alleged to have committed the violation; or (c) Interview any other person, including employees who it believes will be helpful in furnishing information relevant to the inquiry.

24 C.F.R. § 4.36 Action by the Ethics Law Division.

(a) After review of the Inspector General's report, the Ethics Law Division shall determine whether or not there is sufficient information providing a reasonable basis to believe that a violation of Section 103 or this subpart B has occurred. (b) If the Ethics Law Division determines that there is no reasonable basis to believe that a violation of Section 103 or this subpart B has occurred, it shall close the matter and send its determination to the Office of Inspector General. (c) If the Ethics Law Division determines that there is sufficient information to provide a reasonable basis to believe that a violation of Section 103 or this subpart B has occurred, it shall: (1) Send its determination to the Office of Inspector General; and (2) Refer the matter to the appropriate official for review as to whether to impose a civil money penalty in accordance with 24 CFR part 30; provided, however, that the Ethics Law Division shall not make a civil money penalty recommendation unless it finds the violation to have been knowing and material. The decision to impose a civil money penalty in a particular matter may be made only upon referral from the Ethics Law Division. (d) In determining whether a violation is material, the Ethics Law Division shall consider the following factors, as applicable: (1) The content of the disclosure and its significance to the person to whom the disclosure was made; (2) The time during the selection process when the disclosure was made; (3) The person to whom the disclosure was made; (4) The dollar amount of assistance requested by the person to whom the disclosure was made; (5) The dollar amount of assistance available for a given competition or program; (6) The benefit, if any, received or expected by the employee, the employee's relatives or friends, or any other person with whom the employee is affiliated; (7) The potential injury to the Department. (e) If the Ethics Law Division determines that there is sufficient information to provide a reasonable basis to believe that a violation of Section 103 or this subpart B has occurred, it may, in addition to referring the matter under 24 CFR part 30, refer the matter to an appropriate HUD official for consideration of any other available disciplinary action. Any referral authorized by this paragraph (e) shall be reported to the Inspector General and may be reported to the employee's supervisor.

24 C.F.R. § 4.38 Administrative remedies.

(a) If the Department receives or obtains information providing a reasonable basis to believe that a violation of Section 103 has occurred, the Department may impose a sanction, as determined to be appropriate, upon an applicant for or a recipient of assistance who has received covered selection information. (b) In determining whether a sanction is appropriate and if so which sanction or sanctions should be sought, the Secretary shall give consideration to the applicant's conduct with respect to the violation. In so doing, the Secretary shall consider the factors listed at § 4.36(d), as well as any history of prior violations in any HUD program, the benefits received or expected, deterrence of future violations and the extent of any complicity in the violation. (c) The Secretary may impose a sanction authorized by this section whether or not the Ethics Law Division refers a case under 24 CFR part 30, and whether or not a civil money penalty is imposed.

Starting a business? Corpus forms LLCs in all 50 states and DC.