We audited Tuscan Homes I and II, a multifamily project located in Hartford, CT, because our risk assessment ranked the project as the highest risk multifamily project in New England.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the owner managed the project in accordance with its regulatory agreement and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements; specifically, whether (1) exigent health and safety…

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…

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…

We audited the State of Connecticut’s Small Cities Community Development Block Grant program based on an Office of Inspector General risk assessment, which ranked the State as the highest risk grantee in Connecticut.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the State ensured that its grantees properly administered their housing rehabilitation programs.  We also assessed various complaints made against the program to…

We audited the Federal Housing Administration-insured nursing home, Middlesex Health Care Center in Middletown, CT, because we identified profitability and solvency issues during ongoing work with the Section 232 program.  Additionally, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) identified the project as potentially troubled as of November 2017.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the project was…

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…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of New Haven’s Housing Choice Voucher program based on our risk assessment of the program for the New England region, the size of the Authority’s program, the time lapse since our last audit, and the inherent risk of the program. Our audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials only made eligible housing assistance payments.  Authority officials made $314,611 in…

We audited the Federal Housing Administration-insured nursing home, Riverside Health and Rehabilitation Center (the project), of East Hartford, CT, based on our risk assessment of nursing homes in the New England region.  Additionally, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) identified the project as potentially troubled as of January 9, 2017, and four physical inspections performed by HUD’s Real Estate…

We audited the public housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs at the Housing Authority of the City of Hartford, CT, as a result of a hotline complaint alleging potential noncompliance with procurement requirements.  The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority complied with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Federal procurement requirements and the Authority’s procurement policy.…

We audited the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) assistance grant provided to the State of Connecticut by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to monitor the expenditures of CDBG-DR funds as required by the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act.  Additionally, the State was ranked first in a risk assessment of the five New England Hurricane Sandy grantees.  The audit objective…

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…

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.…

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…

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…

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…

We audited the Waterbury Housing Authority’s administration of its asset management projects based on a risk assessment that considered the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) risk assessment and the Authority’s funding and number of asset management units.  Our overall audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials ensured that expenses charged to the Authority’s asset management projects…

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…

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…

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-…

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, (…