Gruening Park Apartments, Juneau, AK, Did Not Always Comply With HUD Rules and Regulations
he U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited Gruening Park Apartments, a 96-unit apartment complex in Juneau, AK, owned and operated by Alaska Housing Development Corporation, Inc., to determine whether the owner administered the project and its programs in compliance with the regulatory agreement and other HUD requirements. We selected this project primarily due to its having a significantly...
Septiembre 05, 2012
Report
#2012-SE-1006
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation’s Management and Occupancy Reviews Were Not Always as Comprehensive as Required for a Section 8 Performance-Based Contract Administrator
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Section 8 Performance Based Contract Administration (PBCA) program of the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (Corporation). We wanted to determine whether the Corporation fulfilled its contractual responsibilities as a performance-based contract administrator (contract administrator) of project-based Section 8 housing assistance payments...
Diciembre 16, 2010
Report
#2011-SE-1001
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, Anchorage, AK, Needs To Improve Its Quality Control Plan
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program of the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). We wanted to determine whether AHFC admitted and housed tenants properly, calculated tenant rents correctly, and maintained an effective quality control program. We also wanted to determine whether AHFC properly administered its HUD Veterans Affairs...
Septiembre 27, 2010
Report
#2010-SE-1002
Guam Housing and Urban Renewal Authority generally had effective and efficient operations in place to manage its Capital Fund Recovery Act Grant, Sinajana, Guam
We conducted a review of the Guam Housing and Urban Renewal Authority (the authority) because it received more than $1.9 million in Capital Fund Recovery Act Grant (grant) funding as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Our objectives were to determine whether the authority (1) had effective and efficient operations in place to manage its grant-funded projects and (2) had administered its grant funds in accordance with U....
Diciembre 01, 2009
Report
#2010-LA-1002