The City of Richmond, CA, Did Not Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program in Accordance With Requirements
We audited the City of Richmond’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program 1 (NSP1) in response to HUD Office of Community Planning and Development’s concerns over the City’s management of its NSP1. Our objective was to determine whether the City administered its NSP1 in accordance with requirements related to procurement and cost eligibility.
The City did not administer its NSP1 in accordance with requirements related to procurement and cost...
Agosto 22, 2014
Report
#2014-LA-1005
The County of San Bernardino, CA, Adequately Ensured That NSP Developer Fees Met HUD Requirements
We reviewed the developer fees the County of San Bernardino paid to its Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) developers. Our objective was to determine whether the County adequately ensured that NSP developer fees paid to its developers met HUD requirements. We performed our review to address questionable costs identified during a prior Office of Inspector General (OIG) review (audit report 2014-LA-0002). During that...
Junio 05, 2014
Report
#2014-LA-1003
The City of Hawthorne, CA, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program Cost Allocations in Accordance With HUD Rules and Requirements
We initiated a review of the City of Hawthorne’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and CDBG-Recovery Act (CDBG-R) program, based on a request by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Los Angeles Office of Community Planning and Development. Our objective was to determine whether the City adequately supported its salary and program administrative cost allocations to the CDBG and CDBG-R programs in accordance...
Septiembre 20, 2013
Report
#2013-LA-1010
The City of Santa Ana, CA, Did Not Administer Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 Funds in Accordance With HUD Rules and Requirements
We audited the City of Santa Ana’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 (NSP2). We initiated the audit as part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) fiscal year 2012-2013 annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the City administered its program funds in accordance with applicable HUD rules and requirements. Specifically, our focus was to determine...
Junio 17, 2013
Report
#2013-LA-1006
The City of Long Beach, CA, Did Not Fully Comply With Federal Regulations When Administering Its NSP2 Grant
We conducted an audit of the City of Long Beach because it was awarded more than $22.2 million in Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 (NSP2) funds on February 11, 2010 as the lead agency in a consortium with Habitat for Humanity of Greater Los Angeles (Habitat), making it one of the largest NSP2 fund recipients in the Los Angeles area. Our objective was to determine whether the City of Long Beach...
Septiembre 21, 2012
Report
#2012-LA-1012
Los Angeles Neighborhood Housing Services, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Properly Administer Its NSP2 Grant
We audited the Los Angeles Neighborhood Housing Services’ Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 (NSP2). We performed the audit because American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 reviews are part of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) annual plan and Neighborhood Housing Services was awarded $60 million in Recovery Act NSP2 funds in a consortium agreement with 12 other organizations on February 11, 2010. Our audit objective was to...
Junio 05, 2012
Report
#2012-LA-1007
The City of Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Expend Brownfields Economic Development Initiative and Section 108 Funds for the Goodyear Industrial Tract Project in Accordance With HUD Requirements
The City did not expend Brownfields and Section 108 funds awarded for the development of the project in accordance with HUD requirements. Specifically, the City used loan and grant funds for an ineligible project and expended grant funds after the grant deadline. As a result, it expended (1) $3.8 million in loan funds on an ineligible project, (2) $625,000 in grant funds on an ineligible project after the grant expenditure deadline, and (3) an...
Marzo 13, 2012
Report
#2012-LA-1005
People Assisting the Homeless, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Ensure That Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Funds Were Used To Assist Eligible and Supported Participants
We audited the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) of People Assisting the Homeless (PATH) and three of its subgrantees based on the results of a separate audit of the City of Los Angeles Housing Department (Department). HPRP is part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), and auditing the Recovery Act program is part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of...
Mayo 17, 2011
Report
#2011-LA-1010
Special Services for Groups, Los Angeles, CA, Approved Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program Assistance for Unsupported and Ineligible Participants
We audited the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) of Special Services for Groups (Special Services) based on the results of a separate audit of the City of Los Angeles Housing Department (Department). Special Services is a subrecipient of the Department’s HPRP. HPRP is part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), and auditing Recovery Act programs is one of the U.S. Department of Housing...
Abril 06, 2011
Report
#2011-LA-1009
Allegations of Lutheran Social Services of Northern California's Misuse of Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program Funds Were Unsubstantiated
We audited Lutheran Social Services of Northern California (auditee) in response to a hotline complaint. The complaint alleged that the auditee misused Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) funds. The specific allegations included (1) ineligible purchases using employee credit cards, (2) unreasonable rental of storage units, (3) caseworkers qualifying family and friends for HPRP who were not eligible, (4) diversion of...
Febrero 07, 2011
Report
#2011-LA-1007
The City and County of San Francisco, CA, Did Not Always Ensure That Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Funds Were Used as Required
We audited the City and County of San Francisco (City) because its grant of more than $8.7 million was one of the largest Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) grants in the State of California. Our objective was to determine whether the City disbursed HPRP funding in accordance with program requirements. The City paid for HPRP services for ineligible participants and participants whose eligibility was not supported. It...
Diciembre 20, 2010
Report
#2011-LA-1005
The City of Los Angeles Housing Department, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Effectively Administer Its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program
We audited the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (program) at the City of Los Angeles Housing Department (Department) because it was the second largest single program grant awarded within California under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). In addition, our audit is part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) national mandate to monitor...
Octubre 25, 2010
Report
#2011-LA-1001
Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency Did Not Always Administer the Neighborhood Stabilization Program in Accordance With HUD Rules and Regulations
We audited the Sacramento Housing Redevelopment Agency (Agency) as a result of a hotline complaint, which alleged violations of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (program) funds provided through the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. Our objective was to determine whether the alleged violations had merit. The complaint alleged several instances where the Agency did not follow program rules and regulations, including but not limited to...
Junio 02, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1011
The City of Los Angeles Housing Department Generally Had Sufficient Capacity and Adequate Internal Controls To Administer its Neighborhod Stabilization Program Funds
We completed a capacity review of the City of Los Angeles’ Housing Department’s (City) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the review because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) reviews are part of our annual audit plan and the program was identified as high risk. We previously audited several different aspects of the City’s HOME Investment Partnerships program, all of which disclosed significant monitoring...
Marzo 17, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1008
The County of San Bernardino, CA, Had Questionable Capacity to Administer Neighborhood Stabilization Program Funds
We completed a capacity review of the County of San Bernardino’s (County) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the audit because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 reviews are part of the Office of the Inspector General’s annual audit plan and the Program was identified as high risk. In addition, the County was awarded significant Program funds of $22.7 million. Our objective was to determine whether the County...
Febrero 10, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1007
City of Fresno Generally Had Sufficient Capacity and the Necessary Controls to Manage and Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program
We completed a capacity review of the City of Fresno’s (City) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the audit because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 reviews are part of the Office of the Inspector General’s annual audit plan and the program was identified as high risk. In addition, the City was awarded a $10.9 grant. Our objective was to determine whether the City had sufficient capacity and the necessary...
Febrero 02, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1006
Although the County of Riverside Had Sufficient Overall Capacity, It Lacked Necessary Controls To Administer its Neighborhood Stabilization Program
We completed a capacity review of the County of Riverside’s (County) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the audit because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 reviews are part of the Office of the Inspector General’s annual audit plan and the program was identified as high risk. In addition, the County was awarded significant Program funds of $48.6 million. Our objective was to determine whether the County had...
Diciembre 28, 2009
Report
#2010-LA-1004
City of Los Angeles' Community Development Department, Los Angeles, California, Projects Dd Not Comply with Community Development Block Grant Program Requirements
We audited the City of Los Angeles’ Community Development Department (City) as a result of problems noted during a prior audit involving activities administered by the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles (subrecipient). Our objective was to determine whether Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds were administered in accordance with HUD’s requirements for the CDBG program as they relate to a specific subrecipient...
Diciembre 03, 2009
Report
#2010-LA-1003
The Los Angeles County Community Development Commission Had Sufficient Capacity and the Necessary Controls to Administer its Neighborhood Stabilization Program
We completed a capacity review of the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission’s (County) Neighborhood Stabilization Program. We performed the audit because Housing and Economic Recovery Act reviews were part of the Office of the Inspector General’s annual audit plan and the program was identified as high risk. In addition, the County was awarded significant Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds of $16.8 million. Our objective...
Septiembre 02, 2009
Report
#2009-LA-1017
State of California’s Department of Housing and Community Development, Sacramento, California, Review of the Allocation Formula for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program
We audited the State of California’s Department of Housing and Community Development (State) to determine the basis and method used to allocate its $145 million in Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) grant funds. Our objective was to determine whether the methodology the State used in allocating its NSP grant funds was logical, equitable, and in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. The State...
Agosto 21, 2009
Report
#2009-LA-1016