The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Benkelman Housing Authority based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General (HUD OIG), Office of Investigation.  Additionally, HUD conducted an onsite assessment in May 2016 and identified concerns, including procurement, income verification, travel policy, and significant control...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General, audited the lender, Berkeley Point Capital, and the underwriting for the Second and Delaware project loan.  We initiated the review of the loan underwriting based on a previous review of the Second and Delaware project, which focused on the construction and development of the project.  The almost $46 million project is Federal Housing Administration (...

We audited the Crisfield Housing Authority’s use of public housing program operating and capital funds because we received a hotline complaint alleging misuse of public housing assets and we had never audited the Authority.  The audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its public housing program in accordance with applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements and its annual...

We audited the Crisfield Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because we received a hotline complaint alleging that it misused public housing assets and we had never audited the Authority.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority (1) ensured that families met eligibility requirements, (2) properly admitted families from the waiting list, (3) correctly calculated housing assistance payments and maintained...

We audited the Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority did not follow program requirements, (2) the Authority administered 1,117 vouchers and received more than $5.2 million in funding for fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program.  Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher...

We audited the Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority did not follow program requirements, (2) the Authority administered 1,117 vouchers and received more than $5.2 million in funding for fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority adequately administered its Housing...

We audited the Housing Opportunities Commission of Montgomery County’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) it had a large program receiving more than $82 million in fiscal year 2015, (2) it had the second largest number of housing choice vouchers of non-Moving to Work housing agencies within the jurisdiction of the Philadelphia region, and (3) we had not audited its program.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the...

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis’ procurement activities due to a hotline complaint.  The complaint alleged that the Authority failed to follow procurement requirements.  This is the second of two audit reports on the Authority.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority procured services and products using operating and capital funds in accordance with applicable requirements. The...

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis’ Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) program due to a hotline complaint.  The complaint alleged that the Authority used ROSS grant funds to pay a resident who did not work on a grant.  This is the first of two audit reports on the Authority.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its ROSS program in accordance with applicable U.S...

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...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the Fairmont Housing Authority in Fairmont, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures. The Authority did not properly...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the York Housing Authority in York, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures. The Authority did not properly procure...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the Stromsburg Housing Authority in Stromsburg, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures. The Authority did not...

We audited the State of Maryland’s Department of Housing and Community Development’s administration of its Emergency Mortgage Assistance program.  We audited the State’s program because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded the State $61.6 million in Emergency Homeowner’s Loan program funds to administer its Emergency Mortgage Assistance program.  Our objective was to determine whether the State...

We audited the Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) it received more than $13.7 million in program funding in fiscal year 2012, (2) it is the largest assisted housing agency in the State of West Virginia, and (3) we had never audited its Housing Choice Voucher program.  The audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met U.S....

We audited the procurement process of Madison Park North Apartments, a Section 236 property, at the request of the Director of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Baltimore Office of Multifamily Housing Programs. We also reviewed Madison’s Park’s use of its reserve for replacement account. Madison Park generally ensured that procurement and reserve for replacement account requirements were met. However, it did not...

We reviewed 32 Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans that New Day Financial, LLC, underwrote as a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) FHA direct endorsement lender. We conducted the review as a result of a risk model assessment that identified mortgage lenders that were at high risk to cause losses to the FHA insurance fund. New Day was one of the lenders identified that made insurance claims within the first 2 years of...

We audited the City of Baltimore, MD's Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program grant because (1) its $9.5 million grant was the largest grant in the State of Maryland, (2) it had disbursed $6.6 million of its grant funds as of December 2011, and (3) we have a mandate to audit American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 activities. The audit objective was to determine whether the City properly obligated and expended grant...

We audited Prince George’s County, MD’s administration of its HOME Investment Partnerships Program as part of our annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the County properly administered its Program by ensuring that its community housing development organizations were eligible and complied with Program requirements, providing rental, home ownership, and rehabilitation assistance in accordance with requirements and implementing...

We audited Mountain CAP of WV, Inc.’s administration of its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program funds. We selected Mountain CAP for audit because of a complaint alleging that controls over its disbursements were weak. Our audit objective was to determine whether Mountain CAP maintained proper financial management of and accountability for its program to ensure that it used the funds according to the American Recovery and...