We completed a review of the New York City Housing Authority’s use of Federal funds. We selected this auditee based on a hotline complaint, case number HL-2011-0705, which alleged a pattern of waste, overspending, and abuse by the Authority. Specifically, the complaint alleged that the Authority (1) froze its Section 8 vouchers due to lack of available funds, (2) overpaid at least one housing manager with an annual salary of $187,000, (3) paid 51 defense attorneys more than $4 million annually, and (4) used Section 8 Federal funds to inefficiently lease office space.

To meet the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) objective to review funds provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and at HUD's suggestion, we reviewed the Housing Authority of the City of Mineral Wells Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act funded activities. Specifically, our objectives were to determine whether the Authority followed the Recovery Act rules and regulations when obligating and expending its Recovery Act capital funds and reported Recovery Act funds, as required.

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Perth Amboy’s transactions with its nonprofit subsidiary, the Perth Amboy Redevelopment Team for Neighborhood Enterprise and Revitalization (PARTNER), in response to a hotline complaint. The audit objectives were to assess the merits of this complaint and determine whether Authority officials complied with provisions of the Authority’s regulatory agreement and other U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) financial and operational regulations when executing transactions with PARTNER.

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Little Rock’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 funding. The Authority received more than $6.5 million in Recovery Act funds through three grants: one formula and two competitive. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) obligated and expended its Recovery Act funding in accordance with HUD rules and regulations and (2) followed Recovery Act reporting requirements. The Authority generally complied with Recovery Act requirements.

We audited the Gonzales Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund formula grant because it met the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) most recent audit plan objective to contribute to the oversight objectives of the Recovery Act and the San Antonio Office of Public Housing recommended it for audit.

We conducted an audit of the Irvington Housing Authority’s (Authority) Capital Fund programs. The audit objectives were to determine whether Authority officials (1) obligated and expended its Capital Funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations, (2) had a financial management system in place that complied with program requirements and (3) whether the allegations in an anonymous complaint could be substantiated.

We conducted an audit the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) oversight of public housing authorities’ (authority) energy conservation procedures through energy performance contracting (EPC) in the states of New York and New Jersey (Region 2). We initiated the audit as part of the activities in our 2010 annual plan.

We conducted an audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) controls over public housing authorities’ (PHA) reporting and accounting for pension and other postemployment benefit obligations. Our concern was whether HUD needed to take action to reduce benefits or provide additional funding to ensure the continued viability of PHAs.

We audited the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority (Authority) administration of its housing assistance payments for leased housing. This is the last of three audit reports we plan to issue on the Authority's program.

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh's (Authority) administration of its leased housing under its Moving to Work Demonstration (Moving to Work) program as part of our fiscal year 2008 audit plan. This is our second audit report issued on the Authority's program. The audit objective addressed in this report was to determine whether the Authority ensured that its leased housing units met the U.S.