Glenbrook Manor Could Not Always Show That Project Costs Were Eligible and Supported in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the multifamily project, Glenbrook Manor, in Stamford, CT, based on a request by officials from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Hartford, CT, Office of Multifamily Housing Programs. Our audit objectives were to determine whether Glenbrook Manor expended project funds for eligible activities and costs that were reasonable and supported, and whether surplus cash was properly calculated and deposited...
Diciembre 15, 2014
Report
#2015-BO-1001
The Owner and Former Management Agents Lacked Adequate Controls Over the Operation of Lake Village of Fairlane Apartments, Dearborn, MI
We audited Lake Village of Fairlane Apartments as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the project based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Detroit Office of Multifamily Housing Programs. Our objective was to determine whether the project’s owner and former management agents operated the project in accordance with HUD’s requirements and the...
Septiembre 30, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1012
The Owner and Former Management Agents Lacked Adequate Controls Over the Operation of Lake Village of Auburn Hills, Auburn Hills, MI
We audited the Lake Village of Auburn Hills multifamily project as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the project based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Detroit Office of Multifamily Housing. Our objective was to determine whether the project’s owner and former management agents operated the project in accordance with the regulatory agreement...
Septiembre 29, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1010
The Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, CT Took Appropriate Action to Resolve a Complaint While Complying With Procurement Regulations
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, doing business as Charter Oak Communities. We received an anonymous complaint against the Authority related to an alleged improper procurement. The complainant alleged that Authority officials awarded a contract to an employee’s spouse without following procurement and conflict-of-interest requirements. In addition, a previous audit (Audit report number 2012-BO-1002...
Septiembre 26, 2014
Memorandum
#2014-BO-1801
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Detroit Office
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Detroit Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Detroit Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Detroit Office’s oversight of public housing environmental reviews within its jurisdiction ensured that (1) the responsible entities performed...
Septiembre 24, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0005
The Pontiac Housing Commission, Pontiac, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Pontiac Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission complied with Federal, State, or its own requirements regarding its Family Self-Sufficiency program and conflicts of interest.
The Commission did not always administer its Family Self-Sufficiency...
Septiembre 12, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1009
The Ferndale Housing Commission, Ferndale, MI, Generally Administered Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Household Files in accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Ferndale Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon an analysis of risk factors related to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objectives were to determine whether the Commission appropriately (1) calculated housing assistance payments, (2) maintained required...
Septiembre 11, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1008
The Jackson Housing Commission, Jackson, MI, Needs To Improve Its Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Jackson Housing Commission’s Section 8 program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based on our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its program in accordance with HUD’s and its own program requirements.
The Commission generally...
Agosto 29, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1007
Authority Officials Did Not Always Follow HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, to address complaints and areas that came to our attention during a prior audit. Our objective was determine whether costs charged to Federal housing programs were eligible, reasonable, and supported. Specifically, we determined whether officials properly (1) charged development staff costs, (2) charged Section 8 consulting costs, (3) implemented flat rents, (4) loaned...
Julio 31, 2014
Report
#2014-BO-1003
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, or Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund competitive grant. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban...
Abril 30, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, Did Not Always Ensure That Expenses Charged to Its Federal Programs Were Eligible, Reasonable, and Supported
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Hartford, CT, field office. HUD officials were concerned about the Authority due to significant financial deficiencies that were not corrected in a timely manner. Our audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials ensured that expenses charged to Federal programs were...
Enero 23, 2014
Report
#2014-BO-1001
The City of Detroit, MI, Lacked Adequate Controls Over Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program-Funded Demolition Activities Under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008
We audited the City of Detroit’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program-funded demolition activities under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. We selected the City based on a request from the Office of Inspector General’s Office of Investigation to work jointly with it on the assignment. Our objectives were to determine whether the City complied with Federal regulations in its (1) maintenance of accounting records for...
Enero 05, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1002
The City of Flint, MI Lacked Adequate Controls Over Its Home Investment Partnerships Program
We audited the City of Flint’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program. We selected the City based upon our analysis of risk factors related to Program grantees in Region 5’s1 jurisdiction. Our objectives were to determine whether the City complied with Federal requirements and its own requirements in the administration of its Program. This is the third of three audit reports on the City’s Program.
The City did not ensure...
Noviembre 14, 2013
Report
#2014-CH-1001
The Michigan State Housing Development Authority, Lansing, MI, Did Not Follow HUD’s Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Program
We audited the Michigan State Housing Development Authority’s multifamily project-based Section 8 program for new-regulation projects as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based on a referral from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) management. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with HUD’s requirements...
Septiembre 30, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1011
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus formula grant. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s1 jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban...
Septiembre 30, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1012
The Flint Housing Commission, Flint, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Flint Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund formula grant based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD), and its own requirements. ...
Septiembre 27, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1009
Independent Bank, Ionia, MI, Generally Complied With HUD’s Quality Control and Underwriting Requirements
We audited Independent Bank, a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) supervised direct endorsement lender. We selected Independent Bank for review based on its overall compare ratio of nearly 200 percent for loans originated in our jurisdiction for a 2-year FHA performance period. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether (1) Independent Bank’s quality...
Septiembre 17, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1007
The State of Michigan Lacked Adequate Controls Over Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
We audited the State of Michigan’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 annual audit plan. We selected the State’s Program based upon our designation of the Program as high risk. Further, we received an anonymous complaint regarding the State’s Program. Our objectives were to determine whether the Michigan State Housing...
Septiembre 15, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1006
The Inkster Housing Commission, Inkster, MI, Did Not Follow HUD’s Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Programs
We audited the Inkster Housing Commission’s public housing and Section 8 programs as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based on a citizen’s complaint to our office and our analysis of risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its programs in accordance with HUD’s and its own...
Agosto 01, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1004
Ofori & Associates, PC, Hartford, CT, Did Not Always Comply With Its REO Contract and Marketing Plan Requirements
We audited Ofori & Associates, PC, regarding its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) real estate-owned (REO) Management and Marketing (M&M) III program. This review was part of the Office of Inspector General’s efforts to improve the integrity of the single-family insurance program. Our audit objective was to determine whether Ofori complied with case processing requirements and timeframes to obtain the highest net...
Febrero 18, 2013
Report
#2013-BO-1001