We conducted a review of the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh’s payments for outside legal services in conjunction with an ongoing internal audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) oversight of public housing agencies’ expenditures for outside legal services.  Our review objective was to determine whether the Authority made payments for outside legal services in compliance with applicable...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited Snohomish County’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement program because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), as part of its 2014 monitoring report, noted findings and concerns related to the County’s use of program income.  In addition, the County’s 2013 risk assessment concluded that procurement was an...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Office of Inspector General audited the Anderson Housing Authority in Anderson, MO’s participation in HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing programs.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements. The Authority did not operate its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements....

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Office of Inspector General audited the Lanagan Housing Authority in Lanagan, MO’s participation in HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing programs.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements. The Authority did not operate its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements. ...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Office of Inspector General audited the Pineville Housing Authority in Pineville, MO’s participation in HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing programs.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements. The Authority did not operate its public housing program in accordance with HUD...

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Durham’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on a hotline citizen complaint and as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own requirements and whether the complaint was valid. The Authority...

We audited the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority’s public housing program based on a request from the Office of Public Housing in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Richmond, VA, field office.  The request was made after media inquiries noted possible fraud, waste, or abuse at the Authority.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with HUD procurement requirements....

We audited the New Hampshire Housing Finance Authority’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program based on a risk analysis of the Authority’s program that considered the amount of funding and the results of HUD monitoring reviews and because the Office of Inspector General had not reviewed the Authority’s HOME program within the past 10 years.  Our audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials administered the HOME program in...

We audited the Waterbury Housing Authority’s administration of its asset management projects based on a risk assessment that considered the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) risk assessment and the Authority’s funding and number of asset management units.  Our overall audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials ensured that expenses charged to the Authority’s asset management projects complied with...

We audited the State of Alabama’s Department of Economic and Community Affairs’ Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) grant.  We selected the State for review because it was awarded more than $49 million in funding to recover from the tornadoes of April 2011.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the State administered its CDBG-DR funds used for infrastructure to ensure that only eligible applicants...

Due to concerns identified by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD), we completed a limited scope, spinoff audit of Veterans First and reviewed additional grants not covered in our original audit (2015-LA-1002, issued April16, 2015).  CPD was concerned that HUD funds for two additional grants not reviewed in the first audit were used to cover shortfalls in Veterans...

We audited the State of Maryland’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery-funded Housing Recovery program.  We conducted the audit because the program was the largest funded program in the State’s first action plan.  Our objectives were to determine whether the State (1) assisted eligible applicants, (2) avoided duplicating assistance, (3) incurred eligible expenses that were properly supported, (4) procured services and...

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of South Bend, IN’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction  and the activities included in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) correctly calculated and paid housing assistance and utility allowances, (2) obtained and...

We audited the Jefferson Metropolitan Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program housing quality standards based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the activities included in our 2015 annual audit plan.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority conducted thorough housing quality standards inspections of its program units in accordance with HUD’s and its own...

We audited the New York State Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Assistance (CDBG-DR) funded New York Rising Housing Recovery Program to address the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act requirement that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, monitor the expenditure of CDBG-DR funds.  State officials allocated more than $1 billion in CDBG-DR funds to the Housing Recovery...

We audited the New York Rising Home Enhanced Buyout Program to address the requirement that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General, monitor the expenditure of Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funds made available by the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act.  Our audit objective was to determine whether New York State officials established adequate controls to ensure that...

In accordance with our regional audit plan, we performed a number of reviews of very small and small housing agencies located in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Region 6 jurisdiction.  We worked with HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) and Departmental Enforcement Center and the Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) Office of Investigation to identify housing agencies with areas of concern. ...

We conducted a limited review of the Cambridge Housing Authority’s Moving to Work Housing Choice Voucher Program’s use of exception payment standards.   This program allows public housing authorities to use exception payment standards to set rental payments in excess of the payment standard established for an authority’s rents . The review was initiated as a result of a concern raised by a member of Congress about whether public...

The Duson Housing Authority failed to administer its public housing programs in accordance with HUD regulations and other requirements.  Specifically, it did not maintain (1) its units and property grounds or perform annual unit inspections, (2) auditable files, (3) adequate documentation to support tenant childcare and medical expense deductions and utility allowances, and (4) its waiting list properly.  This condition occurred...

We audited the Fresno Housing Authority due to a complaint alleging that the Authority steered contracts, did not seek competition for all of its required procurements, and did not maintain adequate supporting documentation.  The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority used its operating and capital funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements when procuring goods and...