We audited the Sanford Housing Authority’s procurement and financial operations.  We selected the Authority based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing, following a technical assistance review performed. The technical assistance review identified issues with the Authority’s procurement practices and financial operations, among other items.  The...

The Inspector General Act of 1978 requires the Inspector General to prepare semiannual reports summarizing the activities of the Office of Inspector General for the preceding six-month periods. The semiannual reports are intended to keep the Secretary and the Congress fully informed of significant findings, progress the Agency has made and recommendations for improvement.

We audited the Muscogee (Creek) Nation’s use of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds in accordance with the Office of Inspector General’s goal to ensure the integrity and soundness of HUD’s Public and Indian Housing programs and to follow up on weaknesses identified in other reviews.  The audit objective was to determine whether the Nation complied with HUD requirements when it housed families and procured contracts...

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Community Development Block Grant program’s property acquisition and disposition activities.  We conducted the audit as part of our annual audit plan.  Our audit objective was to determine whether HUD had adequate oversight of property acquisition and disposition activities under its Block Grant program.  HUD did not always provide adequate oversight of...

We audited the State of Indiana’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program.  The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan.  We selected the State because it received the most program funds under the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act of 2009 in Region 5’s1  jurisdiction.  Our objectives were to determine whether the State’s Office...

We audited the State of Connecticut’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) based on the amount of NSP1 funding received.  The State received more than $25 million in NSP1 funds in program year 2009, making it the second highest funded State in New England, and had not recently been audited by the Office of Inspector General.  Our overall audit objective was to determine whether State officials administered the State’s NSP in...

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, in response to complaints about improper use of funds, procurement irregularities, and inadequate safeguarding of equipment.  The audit objective was to determine whether Federal funds were used for eligible and adequately supported costs, procurements were executed in compliance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations, and the Authority had...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Sunset Manor Apartments to evaluate the allegations in a complaint and determine whether the project’s owner made unauthorized distributions and repayment of advances, maintained complete, accurate, and current books and records for the project, and participated in improper procurement practices.         ...

We audited the City of Miami Beach’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program in accordance with our annual audit plan because it had projects overseen by the same administration questioned in our audit of the City’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program. In addition, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Miami Office of Community Planning and Development ranked the City as high risk in its 2015 risk assessment. Our...

We audited Luzerne County, PA’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery grant provided through the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013.  We selected the County for review because (1) it had obligated the most disaster funds of the three Pennsylvania grantees that received funds through the Act and (2) the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had disbursed approximately $2.1 million to the County as of...

We audited the City of Miami Beach’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program, in accordance with our annual audit plan, because (1) the Miami U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Community Planning and Development ranked the City as high risk in its 2015 risk assessment and (2) HUD’s onsite monitoring review identified concerns with the City’s administration of the HOME program.  Our objective was to determine...

We audited the Richmond Housing Authority due to a complaint alleging that the Authority submitted falsified documentation to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and allowed the City of Richmond to use the Authority’s HUD funds and the Authority’s assets and that the City charged the Authority for rent and services at an unreasonable price.  Our audit objective was to validate complaint allegations regarding whether...

In accordance with our audit plan to review public housing programs, we reviewed the Housing Authority of Fort Worth, TX.  Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) properly administered its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Housing Choice Voucher program and (2) properly used HUD funds and resources for a related entity, FW Hunter Plaza, LP.  With minor exceptions, the Authority generally...

We audited the City of Camden, NJ’s administration of its Community Development Block Grant program.  We conducted the audit because the City was authorized $6.6 million in Block Grant funds for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and we had not audited its program since 1996.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the City ensured that its program activities met national objectives and complied with applicable U.S. Department of...

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) multifamily accelerated processing (MAP) program administered by its Office of Multifamily Production.  We initiated the audit under our annual audit plan.  Our objectives were to determine whether (1) HUD adequately reviewed and approved loans underwritten by MAP-approved lenders for Federal Housing Administration (FHA) insurance and (2) the 2016 MAP Guide was...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited the Alton Housing Authority because it appeared to have flat rents set at a rate below 80 percent of the fair market rent in that area based on the information available in the Public and Indian Housing Information Center system.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with HUD’s flat rent requirements. The Authority did...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited James B. Nutter & Company, a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) lender located in Kansas City, MO.  We selected James B. Nutter based on data analysis showing that the servicer might be completing foreclosures faster than the industry standard, which would suggest that it might not be fully using HUD’s loss mitigation tools.  Our...

We audited the Orange County Housing Authority’s monitoring of its contractors’ performance of housing quality standards inspections of its mobility out units due to inadequacies identified in another review of the Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program’s housing quality standards.  The Authority contracted out the administration and housing quality standards inspections for its mobility out housing units, Housing Choice Voucher...

This report presents the results of our audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) fiscal year 2015 compliance with the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010 (IPERA). For the third consecutive fiscal year,  we determined that HUD did not comply with IPERA.  Out of the six requirements, In fiscal year 2015, HUD complied with four (compliance determinations a, c, d, and f) and did not comply...

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Durham’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program’s housing quality standards based on our recent audit of the Authority’s program, during which potential issues with the Authority’s inspections were noted, and as part of our annual audit plan.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that program units met the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD...