We audited the SFDS Development Corporation (agent), management agent for three U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) subsidized Section 202 elderly housing direct loan properties, in response to a complaint to the Office ofInspector General (OlG) Hotline that alleged misappropriation of HUD funds by the agent. The objective of our review was to assess the merits of the complaint. It was expanded to assess the agent…

We completed an audit of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program administered by the City of Paterson (City). Our audit objectives were to determine whether the City (1) disbursed CDBG funds efficiently and effectively in accordance with its submission to HUD and applicable rules and regulations and (2) had a financial management system in place to adequately safeguard the funds. The City did not always disburse CDBG funds…

We performed a review of the Lutheran Gardens Corporation (Corporation) trust fund account in response to a HUD request, dated March 30, 2009. HUD believed that as much as $2.72 million was withdrawn from a trust account in violation of a trust agreement (agreement) with HUD, dated April 22, 2005, and questioned certain disbursements. Our objective was to determine whether the Corporation withdrew and expended trust funds in…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited Kier Property Management and Real Estate, LLC (Kier) to determine whether Kier properly accounted for property and management agent costs and properly accomplished its occupancy functions. Kier recorded more than $2 million in notes payable in the properties’ books for notes that did not properly restrict repayment of the principal to…

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). Based on the review, the County had the capacity to…

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). Based on the review, the County had the capacity to…

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 audited the Dallas Housing Authority’s (Authority) Recovery Act Public Housing Capital Fund formula grant (grant). Our objective was to evaluate the Authority’s capacity in the areas of internal controls,…

We audited the Section 8 Project-Based Voucher program operated by the State of Massachusetts, Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), as part of our annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the DHCD properly administered its Project-Based Voucher program in compliance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. The DHCD generally administered its program in compliance with…

We audited the Scranton Housing Authority (Authority) based on a referral from our Office of Investigation. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed applicable procurement regulations and used U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds properly. The Authority did not purchase goods, services and property in accordance with applicable HUD requirements, the terms of its annual consolidated…

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 Maine’s (State) Department of Economic and Community Development, Office of Community Development (Department). The…

The State of Arkansas (State) is scheduled to receive more than $15.67 million under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). As part of our organization’s commitment to ensure the proper use of Recovery Act funds, we reviewed the State’s controls and operations. Specifically, our objective was to determine whether the State has the capacity to account for Recovery Act funding and the controls to ensure that…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General performed an audit of Leader Financial Services (Leader), a Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) issuer servicing Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured loans. We initiated the audit based on the 62 percent delinquency rate of Leader’s mortgage-servicing package purchased from Fidelity Home Mortgage Corporation (Fidelity).…

As part of the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Inspector General's obligation to ensure accountability and transparency in use of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) funds, we performed a review to assess the Housing Authority of New Orleans' (Authority) capacity to administer $34.5 million in ARRA funding. Our objective was to evaluate the Authority's capacity and risks in the…

The City of Atlanta (City) received a $12.3 million Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) grant from HUD that was authorized under Title III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act. Also, the City applied for an additional $57.9 million in NSP funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. We selected the City for review due to the amount of its NSP funding and because of performance concerns identified during…

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) annual contributions contracts (contract) for performance-based Section 8 contract administration (PBCA). We audited this contract because our prior audit of HUD payments to the PBCAs for certain performance standards indicated that HUD was not getting the best value for the dollars spent on the PBCA’s services. Our audit objective was to determine whether the…

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 administering…

We audited the City of Los Angeles’ Community Development Department (City) as a result of problems noted during a prior audit involving activities administered by the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles (subrecipient). Our objective was to determine whether Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds were administered in accordance with HUD’s requirements for the CDBG program as they relate to a specific…

We conducted a review of the Guam Housing and Urban Renewal Authority (the authority) because it received more than $1.9 million in Capital Fund Recovery Act Grant (grant) funding as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Our objectives were to determine whether the authority (1) had effective and efficient operations in place to manage its grant-funded projects and (2) had administered its grant funds in…

We audited the Yorkville Cooperative (Cooperative) based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Richmond Multifamily Program Center and a citizen complaint. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Cooperative administered its Section 221(d)(3) property and housing assistance contract according to its regulatory agreement and HUD requirements. The Cooperative did not administer its…