The City of Phoenix Housing Department’s Controls over Section 8 Tenant Eligibility and Rent Determinations Were Not Adequate
We audited the City of Phoenix Housing Department’s (Housing Department) Housing Choice Voucher program. We conducted the audit as part of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) annual plan. The Housing Department was selected for review because it is the largest housing authority in the state of Arizona and had not previously been audited by OIG. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Housing Department supported tenant...
Junio 17, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1011
The Municipality of Caguas, Puerto Rico, Needs to Improve Controls over Its Section 8 Program
As part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General's (OIG) strategic plan, we audited the Municipality of Caguas (authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Our audit objectives were to determine whether Section 8 units met housing quality standards in accordance with HUD requirements and whether the authority properly determined housing assistance subsidies.
Of the 10 units...
Mayo 30, 2008
Report
#2008-AT-1007
Woonsocket Housing Authority, Woonsocket, Rhode Island, Housing Choice Voucher Program and Public Housing Program Deficieincies Resulted in Cost Exceptions Totaling $904,494
We audited the Housing Choice Voucher (Voucher) and public housing programs at the Woonsocket Housing Authority (Authority) as part of our annual audit plan. The overall objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority efficiently and effectively administered its Voucher and public housing programs in compliance with its annual contributions contracts and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. In...
Mayo 14, 2008
Report
#2008-BO-1006
HUD Lacked Adequate Controls over the Physical Condition of Section 8 Voucher Program Housing Stock
As part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General's (OIG) strategic plan, we audited HUD's controls over the physical condition of Section 8 housing stock for the Housing Choice Voucher program. Our objective was to determine whether HUD had adequate controls to ensure that its Section 8 housing stock was in material compliance with housing quality standards.
We found that HUD did...
Mayo 14, 2008
Report
#2008-AT-0003
Corrective Action Verification Opelika Housing Authority Public Housing Programs
HUD OIG performed a corrective action verification of audit recommendations cited in the audit report, Opelika Housing Authority, Public Housing Programs (2004-AT-1011) issued July 23, 2004. The purpose of the corrective action verification was to determine whether the selected audit recommendations were implemented and the deficiencies cited in the report were corrected. The Authority implemented the necessary corrective action for the...
Mayo 12, 2008
Memorandum
#2008-AT-0802
The Shreveport Housing Authority, Shreveport, Louisiana, Made Excessive Housing Assistance Payments in Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Shreveport, LA
As part of the Office of Inspector General's strategic plan, we audited the Shreveport Housing Authority's (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (Section 8 program). Our objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that it made housing assistance payments in accordance with the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Section 8 program requirements. The Authority's contracted...
Mayo 08, 2008
Report
#2008-FW-1009
The Miami Dade Housing Agency, Miami, Florida, Did Not Maintain Adequate Controls over Its Capital Fund Program
HUD-OIG audited the Miami Dade Housing Agency (Agency) capital fund program. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Agency had adequate controls to ensure that contracts were awarded in accordance with regulations and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements.
The Agency did not have adequate controls to ensure that contracts were awarded in accordance with regulations and HUD requirements. It did not...
Abril 24, 2008
Report
#2008-AT-0002
The Des Moines Municipal Housing Agency, Des Moines, Iowa, Did Not Always Assign Proper Voucher Sizes or Accurately Calculate Overpayments From Unreported Income In Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Choice Voucher program of the Des Moines Municipal Housing Agency (Agency) to determine whether the Agency (1) properly considered family composition and reasonable accommodation requests when applying payment standards and (2) took appropriate action when the tenants' files had indications of unreported income. We found that...
Abril 22, 2008
Report
#2008-KC-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Fort Wayne, Indiana, Needs to Improve Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Administration
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Authority of the City of Fort Wayne's (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2007 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V's jurisdiction. Our objective...
Abril 18, 2008
Report
#2008-CH-1007
The Harrisburg Housing Authority, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Did Not Ensure That Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Harrisburg Housing Authority's (Authority) administration of its housing quality standards inspection program for its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on the survey results of our recently completed audit of the Authority's low-rent public housing and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher programs. This is our second audit report issued on the Authority's programs. The audit objective addressed in this...
Abril 15, 2008
Report
#2008-PH-1007
The Indianapolis Housing Agency, Indianapolis, Indiana, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) audited the Indianapolis Housing Agency's (Agency) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2007 annual audit plan. We selected the Agency based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V's jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Agency administered its...
Abril 15, 2008
Report
#2008-CH-1006
The Peoria Housing Authority, Peoria, Illinois, Did Not Effectively Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Peoria Housing Authority's (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2007 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V's jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine...
Abril 10, 2008
Report
#2008-CH-1005
HUD Did Not Ensure That Housing Authorities Properly Administered the Community Service and Self-Sufficiency Requirement
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited HUD's community service and self-sufficiency requirement (the requirement) as a result of news media reports that the requirement is rarely enforced. Our audit objective was to determine whether HUD ensured that housing authorities properly administered the requirement.
We found that HUD did not have adequate controls to ensure that housing...
Marzo 24, 2008
Report
#2008-KC-0002
The Housing Authority of the County of San Joaquin, Stockton, California, Did Not Administer Capital Funds in Accordance with HUD Requirements
We reviewed the Housing Authority of the County of San Joaquin's (the Authority) capital fund program to determine whether it used capital funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules and regulations. The Authority did not use capital funds in accordance with requirements. Specifically, the Authority used $175,775 to absorb shared administrative costs of other housing programs, improperly charged $...
Marzo 05, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1008
Oneida Housing Authority, Oneida, Wisconsin, Did Not Properly Recognize and Use Program Income from Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act-Assisted 1937 Act Housing Projects
We audited Oneida Housing Authority (Authority) to determine whether the Authority calculated program income for NAHASDA-assisted 1937 Act properties in accordance with applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidance, regulations, and requirements and to observe uses of revenue from NAHASDA-assisted 1937 Act properties.
The Authority failed to track Block Grant rehabilitation or capital expenses for each property and...
Febrero 19, 2008
Report
#2008-SE-1002
The Highland Park Housing Commission, Highland Park, Michigan, Did Not Effectively Administer Its Public Housing and Capital Fund Programs
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Highland Park Housing Commission's (Commission) Public Housing and Public Housing Capital Fund programs (programs). The audit was part of the activities in our annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon its fiscal year 2005 independent auditor's report that identified it as having high-risk programs. Our objectives...
Febrero 14, 2008
Report
#2008-CH-1003
Corrective Action Verification Miami-Dade Housing Agency Did Not Ensure Section 8-Assisted Units Met Housing Quality Standards, Audit Report 2006-AT-1001
HUD OIG performed a corrective action verification of the audit recommendations cited in the audit report, Miami-Dade Housing Agency (Agency) Did Not Ensure Section 8-Assisted Units Met Housing Quality Standards (2006-AT-1001) issued December 21, 2005. The purpose of the corrective action verification was to determine if the selected audit recommendations were implemented and the deficiencies reported in the audit report corrected.
The Agency...
Febrero 10, 2008
Memorandum
#2008-AT-0801
The Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, Did Not Adequately Administer Its Section 8 Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles’ (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority determined tenant eligibility and performed annual reexaminations in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. Although we did not identify any tenants that were not eligible for the program, the Authority did not comply with HUD’s requirements or its own administrative plan...
Febrero 07, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1007
The Anaheim Housing Authority, Anaheim, California, Did Not Always Operate Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Effectively
We audited the Anaheim Housing Authority’s (Authority) tenant eligibility and reexamination policies and procedures for its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations in determining tenant eligibility, rent calculations, and rent reasonableness. Although we did not identify any tenants that were not eligible for the Authority’s program...
Enero 15, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1005
The Akron Metropolitan Housing Authority, Akron, Ohio, Lacked Adequate Controls over Its 5(h) Homeownership Proceeds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Akron Metropolitan Housing Authority's (Authority) 5(h) homeownership program (program). We selected the Authority based on a risk analysis showing that it may have improperly used program funds. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority properly accounted for and used its program's proceeds in accordance with...
Enero 08, 2008
Report
#2008-CH-1002