U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know

The .gov means it’s official.

Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure.

The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Hotline

Report Fraud, Waste and Abuse
Export
Date Issued
2010-AT-1010 | August 23, 2010

The Housing Authority of DeKalb County Improperly Used Its Net Restricted Assets

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2010-AT-1010-001-B
    $2,591,854
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    Require the Authority to reimburse the net restricted assets fund account from non-Federal funds the $2,583,244 or the current amount owed.

2010-AT-1003 | April 28, 2010

The Housing Authority of Whitesburg, Kentucky, Mismanaged Its Operations

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2010-AT-1003-001-D
    $134,889
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    Require the Authority to account for $134,889 in tenant rent receipts or repay any unsupported amounts to its public housing operating program from nonfederal funds.

  • 2010-AT-1003-001-F
    $264,229
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    Require the Authority to provide support for $264,229 in disbursements or repay any unsupported costs to its public housing operating and capital improvement program from nonfederal funds.

  • 2010-AT-1003-001-G
    $2,250
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    Require the Authority to reimburse its public housing program $2,250 for ineligible costs using non-federal funds.

  • 2010-AT-1003-001-H
    $27,097
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    Require the Authority to support the $27,097 in unreasonable costs or reimburse its public housing and capital improvement program from nonfederal funds.

  • 2010-AT-1003-001-I
    $446,918
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    Require the Authority to provide support that $446,918 in contracts were fairly and openly competed or reimburse its public housing and capital improvement program from nonfederal funds.

  • 2010-AT-1003-001-J
    $275,282
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    Require the Authority to provide support for the $275,282 in capital fund drawdowns or reimburse its capital improvement program from nonfederal funds.

2009-NY-1011 | May 15, 2009

North Hempstead Housing Authority, Great Neck, New York, Had Weaknesses in Its Housing Choice Voucher and Family Self-Sufficiency Programs

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2009-NY-1011-002-G
    $50,237
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director, Office of Public Housing, New York, instruct Authority officials to seek repayment of $50,237 in ineligible housing assistance payments.

2008-CH-1013 | September 24, 2008

The Highland Park Housing Commission, Highland Park, Michigan, Lacked Adequate Controls Over Unit Conditions and Maintenance Program

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2008-CH-1013-001-A
    $46,478
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its program $46,478 from nonfederal funds for the 34 units cited in this finding that were in material noncompliance.

  • 2008-CH-1013-002-A
    $29,148
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its program $29,148 from nonfederal funds for the seven long-term vacant units it inappropriately included in its program operating subsidy calculations.

2008-CH-1006 | April 15, 2008

The Indianapolis Housing Agency, Indianapolis, Indiana, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2008-CH-1006-002-E

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Cleveland Office of Public Housing require the Agency to determine the appropriate administrative fees for the applicable households for which it is unable to provide supporting documentation cited in recommendation 2D and reimburse its program the applicable amount from nonfederal funds.

2008-CH-1003 | February 14, 2008

The Highland Park Housing Commission, Highland Park, Michigan, Did Not Effectively Administer Its Public Housing and Capital Fund Programs

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2008-CH-1003-001-A
    $153,223
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to provide supporting documentation or reimburse its Public Housing program $153,223 ($22,092 for household eligibility and $131,131 for continued occupancy) from nonfederal funds for the unsupported operating subsidies related to the 36 household files cited in this finding.

  • 2008-CH-1003-001-B
    $28,663
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its Public Housing program $28,663 ($16,262 plus $12,401) from nonfederal funds for the lost total household payments for 23 households cited in this finding.

  • 2008-CH-1003-001-C
    $13,070
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse the appropriate households $13,070 for the underpayment of housing assistance and utility allowance payments cited in this finding.

  • 2008-CH-1003-001-F
    $7,932
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its Public Housing program $7,932 in operating subsidies from nonfederal funds for the two properties sold by the City.

  • 2008-CH-1003-002-A
    $61,202
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to provide supporting documentation for the use of $61,202 for work performed under its Public Housing Capital Fund program or reimburse its program from nonfederal funds for the applicable amount.

  • 2008-CH-1003-002-B
    $82,774
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to provide support that the use of $82,774 ($27,286 to three family members, $23,418 to two independent contractors, $22,150 to CLM Architects, and $9,920 to Harold Dunne, Attorney at Law) in Public Housing program funds for housing maintenance, cleaning, and professional services were reasonable or reimburse its program from nonfederal funds for the applicable amount.

2007-NY-1006 | May 24, 2007

Housing Authority of the City of Asbury Park, New Jersey

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2007-NY-1006-001-A
    $692,990
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the director of HUD’s Office of Public Housing instruct the Authority to reimburse HUD for the excessive administrative fee charge of $692,990 in capital funds in accordance with the procedures described in 24 CFR 905.120.

2007-CH-1005 | March 23, 2007

The Housing Authority of the City of Gary, Indiana, Lacked Adequate Controls over Refunding Savings

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2007-CH-1005-001-A
    $913,365
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the director of HUD’s Cleveland Office of Public Housing require the Authority to provide documentation to support that the $913,365 in refunding savings cited in this finding was used to provide affordable, decent, safe, and sanitary housing to very low-income households or reimburse from nonfederal funds its refunding savings account(s), as appropriate, to be able to trace its use of the savings.

2007-CH-1002 | January 24, 2007

Benton Harbor Housing Commission, Benton Harbor, Michigan, Did Not Effectively Manage Its Public Housing Program and Has Not Used Special Purpose Grant Funds It Received More Than Nine Years Ago

Public and Indian Housing

  • 2007-CH-1002-002-A
    $166,782
    Questioned Costs

    Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.

    We recommend that the director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to provide supporting documentation or reimburse its program $166,782 from nonfederal funds for the unsupported operating subsidies related to the 51 household files cited in this finding.

Displaying 3021 - 3040 of 3059 Recommendations