We audited the Philadelphia Housing Authority’s (Authority) management of lead‐based paint in its public housing program based on our assessment of the risks of lead‐based paint in public housing agencies’ (PHA) housing developments. The risk factors included the age of buildings, the number of units, household demographics, reported cases of childhood lead poisoning, and reports of missing lead‐based paint inspections in HUD’s data…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), audited the Nampa Housing Authority’s public housing program in response to a local OIG, Office of Investigation, referral.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority followed U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) public housing requirements pertaining to (1) calculating contract rents, (2) maintaining its…

We audited the Philadelphia, PA, Housing Authority’s use of public housing program operating funds because we received a complaint alleging that the Authority misused U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds.  Our objective was to determine whether allegations from the complaint had merit.  We focused the audit on whether the Authority properly procured (1) relocation services, (2) job training services, (…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Easton, PA’s Housing Choice Voucher Program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority made improper payments to program participants and a consultant to the Authority inappropriately placed herself on the program waiting list and (2) we had never audited the Authority.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in…

We audited the City of Erie, PA’s Community Development Block Grant program because we received a complaint regarding its code enforcement program and we had not audited the City’s program since 1997.  The complaint alleged that the City targeted low- to middle-income residents in certain neighborhoods requiring expensive repairs to their homes and properties, which could result in legal actions and liens if the homeowners did…

We audited the Adams County Housing Authority because (1) a news article reported that the executive director received an excessive salary and practiced nepotism, (2) we received a complaint alleging nepotism and potential misuse of Federal funds, and (3) we had never audited the Authority.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program according to applicable U.S. Department of Housing and…

We audited Diamond Park because of concerns raised by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Departmental Enforcement Center regarding the management of the project and we had never audited it.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the owner managed the project in accordance with its regulatory agreement and HUD requirements.  We focused the audit on reviewing (1) participant eligibility and…

We audited the Chester Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) it recently regained control of its operations after 20 years in receivership, (2) it had 1,566 vouchers and received more than $14.9 million in fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met the U.S. Department of…

We audited Schwenckfeld Manor because it was a high-risk multifamily project on our multifamily risk assessment for projects within our region and we had never audited it.  Our audit objectives were to determine whether the project owner (1) disbursed project funds for costs that were reasonable, necessary, and supported for the operation and maintenance of the project; and (2) properly disclosed identity-of-interest…

We audited Laurentian Hall Apartments (project) because of its failure to submit financial statements in a timely manner and because we had never audited the project before.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the project’s owner managed the project in accordance with its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-held mortgage and other HUD requirements. The owner of Laurentian Hall Apartments did not…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited Solace LLC’s Section 8 housing assistance payments program because of the results of our previous audit of another multifamily property.  The person responsible for housing assistance program issues at the other property was also Solace’s manager.  Our objectives were to determine whether Solace correctly computed tenant annual…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited Reflection5 LLC’s Section 8 housing assistance payments program because of the results of a previous audit of another multifamily property.  The person responsible for housing assistance program issues at the other property was also involved with the housing assistance program at Reflection5.  Our objectives were to determine…

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 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…

We audited the Westmoreland County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) authorized it more than $8.7 million in program funding per year in fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and we had not audited its program.  This is the second of two audit reports on the Authority’s program.  Our objectives in this audit were to determine whether the Authority…

We audited the Westmoreland County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program.  We selected the Authority for audit because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) authorized it more than $8.7 million in program funding per year for fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and we had not audited its program.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority managed its waiting list and selected…

We conducted a review of the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh’s payments for outside legal services in conjunction with an ongoing internal audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) oversight of public housing agencies’ expenditures for outside legal services.  Our review objective was to determine whether the Authority made payments for outside legal services in compliance with applicable…

We audited the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency’s implementation of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Loss Mitigation program for loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA).  We conducted the audit because the Agency had the largest active portfolio and the largest number of delinquent loans for servicers located in Pennsylvania as of October 2014.  Our objectives were to…

We audited the Bucks County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) authorized it more than $15 million per year in fiscal years 2012 to 2014 and we had not audited its housing quality standards inspection program.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met HUD’s housing quality…

We conducted a review of the Philadelphia Housing Authority’s compliance with Federal lobbying disclosure requirements and restrictions.  We found that the Authority engaged in the prohibited practice of using Federal funds for lobbying and a former executive director certified to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that it did not do so.  In addition, the former executive director falsely certified to…