We audited the City of Atlanta, GA, and its subrecipient, the Fulton County-City of Atlanta Land Bank Authority.  We began our review of the City’s administration of its Neighborhood Stabilization Programs 1 (NSP1) and 3 (NSP3) grants because it aligns with our goal in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s annual audit plan to improve HUD’s execution of and accountability for grant funds...

We audited the Housing Authority of DeKalb County’s Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) conversion and Public Housing Capital Fund program.  We selected the Authority for review in accordance with our annual audit plan.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority properly administered its RAD conversion and obligated and authorized capital funds in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General (OIG) assisted the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Northern District of Alabama in the civil investigation of Guardian Pest Services, Inc., doing business as Knox Pest Control and J.J.S.K. Solutions, Inc.  Knox Pest Control has its principal place of business in Columbus, GA.  A HUD home is a one-to-four unit residential property acquired by HUD as...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, and Johnson County Audit Services, Johnson County, KS, audited the City of Olathe, KS, based on a hotline complaint.  Our audit objectives were to determine whether (1) the complainant’s allegations were substantiated, (2) the City listed the proper affordability period for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) homes it sold, and (3) the City...

We audited the Georgia Housing and Finance Authority’s implementation of the Federal Housing Administration’s Home Affordable Modification Program (FHA-HAMP).  We selected the Authority because (1) our data analysis showed that the Authority had the highest ratio of FHA-HAMP actions to delinquent loans within the jurisdiction of our regional office, (2) the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) office located in Atlanta,...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG) assisted in an investigation into alleged violations of Federal Housing Administration (FHA) regulations by Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corporation and Home America Mortgage, Inc.  The investigation included a qui tam action filed under the False Claims Act in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.  The False...

We audited St. Francis Hospital, Inc. because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Hospital Facilities, requested immediate assistance from HUD’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) to review suspected violations of the hospital’s regulatory agreement and rider (including covenants).  Our objective was to determine whether the hospital complied with the executed regulatory agreement and HUD requirements for...

In accordance with our regional plan to review public housing programs and because of a complaint filed by a contractor with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and issues identified by HUD’s Office of Public Housing, we performed a review of the Hot Springs Housing Authority.  The contractor alleged that the Authority did not procure a contract in compliance with Federal...

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Comer’s financial and procurement operations.  We selected the Authority based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Georgia State Office of Public Housing regarding significant deficiencies identified during its August 2013 management review.  HUD’s Office of Public Housing identified findings regarding the misuse of funds, a lack of governance...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited Breakthrough Living Program based on an audit referral memorandum received from the Director of HUD’s Southwest Region, Office of Multifamily Housing Programs.  The referral cited several concerns, including the property’s unilateral withdrawal of funds from the reserve for replacement account.  Our audit objective was to determine whether...

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Kansas City, KS, Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Kansas City Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Kansas City Office ensured that (1) the responsible entities or the Kansas City Office performed the required reviews and (2) HUD did not...

The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Wichita, KS, Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program. We selected the Authority for review because it received more than $12 million in Section 8 funding in both 2011 and 2010. Also, it is one of the largest housing authorities in Kansas and had not been reviewed by HUD OIG. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Manhattan, KS Housing Authority’s administration of its Recovery Act capital fund grants. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority executed a contract change order in compliance with HUD procurement regulations and the Authority’s procurement policy and accurately and completely reported Recovery Act grant information in...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Topeka, KS Housing Authority’s administration of its Recovery Act competitive capital fund grants. We selected the Authority for review because it spent a large amount of Recovery Act funds. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority expended Recovery Act grant funds in accordance with Recovery Act requirements and applicable HUD...

We audited DeKalb County’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program because it received more than $8 million in HOME funding since 2008. Our objective was to determine whether the County accurately entered commitments and project completion data into HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System. The County did not require that the signatures of all parties who signed written agreements be dated to support whether the commitments were made...

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Little Rock’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 funding. The Authority received more than $6.5 million in Recovery Act funds through three grants: one formula and two competitive. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) obligated and expended its Recovery Act funding in accordance with HUD rules and regulations and (2) followed Recovery Act reporting requirements...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited HUD’s Region VII Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) to determine whether it complied with HUD’s monitoring requirements for Recovery Act recipients. The Region VII CPD office complied with HUD’s monitoring requirements for Recovery Act recipients. It appropriately established and implemented a risk assessment process to target...

HUD OIG performed an audit of the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program at the Georgia Department of Community Affairs. The audit was part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) national mandate to oversee and audit grant activities funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). We selected the Georgia Department of Community Affairs...

We audited the West Memphis Housing Authority (Authority) in Arkansas as part of our annual audit plan to review American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (Recovery Act). Our objective was to determine whether obligations the Authority made between January 30 and March 17, 2010, were appropriate, prudent, eligible, and supported, whether procurements and disbursements were made in accordance with requirements. Generally, the Authority complied...