Develop and implement procedures, including but not limited to software upgrades, and staff training to ensure that unit inspections are conducted in a timely manner.
Publication Report
2018-AT-1006 | Julio 13, 2018
The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority, Lexington, KY, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our risk assessment of all Kentucky public housing agencies and as part of the activities in our annual audit plan. Our audit... másRelated Recommendations
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2018-AT-1006-001-AOpenClosedClosed on Mayo 28, 2020$124,075.00Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A] resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B] that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost]; or (C] that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
SummaryReimburse its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program $124,075 ($108,687 in housing assistance payments and $15,388 in associated administrative fees) from non-Federal funds for the payments related to the Authority-owned units’ inspections not conducted by an independent entity.
- Summary
Ensure that HUD-approved independent third parties complete unit inspections and determine the rent reasonableness determinations for units it owns or seek an appropriate exemption of program requirements from the HUD Secretary.
- Summary
Provide adequate training to its staff to ensure compliance with Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program requirements for unit inspections and rent reasonableness determinations.
- Status2018-AT-1006-002-AOpenClosedClosed on Mayo 28, 2020$37,508.00Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A] resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B] that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost]; or (C] that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
SummaryReimburse its program $37,508 ($33,085 in housing assistance payments and $4,423 in associated administrative fees) from non-Federal funds for failing to perform unit inspections in a timely manner.
- Summary
Develop and implement adequate oversight to ensure that unit inspections are conducted in a timely manner.
- Status2018-AT-1006-003-AOpenClosedClosed on Mayo 28, 2020$6,084.00Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A] resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B] that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost]; or (C] that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
SummaryReimburse its program $6,084 ($5,553 in housing assistance payments and $531 in associated administrative fees) from non-Federal funds for the units that materially failed to meet HUD’s housing quality standards.
- Summary
Certify, along with the owners of the 26 units cited in the finding, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected.
- Summary
Perform all required quality control housing quality standards inspections in compliance with its HUD-approved MTW plan, thus helping to ensure that its inspectors perform housing quality standards inspections in accordance with HUD’s requirements.