Buscar

The U.S.

We completed a follow-up review regarding our recommendations made to the U.S. Department of Housing Urban and Development’s (HUD) Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) pertaining to our inspection of the State of Louisiana’s Road Home Elevation Incentive program, IED-09-002, issued in March 2010.

In accordance with our goal to review Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 grantees and because of weaknesses identified by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated a review of the City of San Antonio’s activities funded by its Neighborhood Stabilization Program 1 grant.

The Director of the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Oklahoma City Office of Community Planning and Development requested that we perform a corrective action verification of recommendation 1B in audit report 2008-FW-1012, The City of Tulsa, OK, Allowed Its Largest Subrecipient To Expend $1.5 Million in Unsupported CDBG Funding. We expanded the review to include recommendation 1C.

As part of the Office of Inspector General’s commitment to ensure the proper use of America Recovery and Reinvestment Act and Housing and Economic Recovery Act funds, we assessed the City of Oklahoma City’s capacity and risks in three areas: internal controls, financial operations, and procurement. Our review did not disclose any reportable conditions or control deficiencies.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General reviewed the State of Indiana’s (State) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). The review was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2010 annual audit plan. We selected the State based upon a citizen’s complaint to our office. Our objective was to determine whether the State awarded Program funds to eligible projects.

As part of our organization’s commitment to ensure the proper use of recovery funding, we performed a review of the City of Grand Prairie’s (City) operations to evaluate its capacity to administer the $3.2 million received under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act).

As part of the Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) directive to determine whether safeguards exist to ensure that American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) funds are used for their intended purposes, we conducted a capacity review of the City San Antonio, TX (City) operations.

We reviewed the County because it received more than $19 million in NSP funds and in 2008, HUD rated the County’s HOME program as high risk. Our objectives were to determine whether the County had the capacity to effectively and efficiently administer its NSP and whether it accurately reported HOME commitments within HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS).

In accordance with our goal to review and ensure the proper administration of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds provided under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) and/or the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), we conducted a capacity review of the operations of the State of Vermont’s (State) Agency of Commerce and Community Development (Agency), which has responsibility for administeri