We completed an audit of the Housing Authority of the City of Miami Beach, Florida (HACMB). We conducted the audit pursuant to a request by your office dated July 9, 1999. This report contains four findings that require follow-up action by your office to ensure HACMB implements appropriate corrective action. Within 60 days please give us a status report, for each recommendation in this report, on: (1) the corrective action taken; (2) the proposed corrective action and the date to be completed; or (3) why action is considered unnecessary.

HUD became aware of the financial problems of HACC when the staff of the Office of Public Housing, Pennsylvania State Office, met with representatives of HACC on October 2, 2000.  HACC requested the meeting to discuss its declining Public Housing and Section 8 reserves and a shortfall in Hope VI funds. A HUD technical review was performed in October 2000 and the results were discussed with the HACC on November 20, 2000. At that time HACC was advised to immediately stop funding the private development company with Public Housing and Section 8 funds.

We completed an audit of the Coshocton Metropolitan Housing Authority's Public Housing Program. The review of the Housing Authority's Public Housing Program was conducted as part of a comprehensive review of the Authority. The comprehensive review was performed based upon a request from HUD's Columbus Field Office Coordinator of Public Housing Program Center.

We completed an audit of the Fayette County Housing Authority's Section 8 Housing Program. The objective of our audit was to determine whether the Housing Authority operated its Section 8 Program in an efficient and effective manner and provided decent, safe and sanitary housing to its Section 8 tenants in compliance with HUD's requirements. We performed the audit in response to a request from HUD's Public Housing Program Center Coordinator, Indianapolis Field Office.

Our review identified several conditions regarding the use of HUD funds that were in violation of the ACC. As of September 30, 2003, PRPHA accounting records reflected net account receivables owed to its Low-Income Public Housing Program exceeding $5.97 million.

What We Audited and Why We completed an audit of the operations of the Petersburg Redevelopment and Housing Authority (Authority) in response to a citizen's complaint.

What We Audited and Why We audited the Durham Housing Authority's (Authority) financial operations and procurement procedures, because a prior Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audit identified potential deficiencies in these areas. Our audit objectives were to determine if the Authority's misuse of funds, identified in our prior report, jeopardized its ability to operate its projects in a manner that promotes serviceability, economy, efficiency, and stability, and whether the Authority followed Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) procurement regulations whe

What We Audited and Why We completed an audit of the Royal Oak Township Housing Commission's Public Housing Program. We selected the Housing Commission for audit based on two citizen complaints. The complainants alleged that the Housing Commission's Public Housing units were in poor physical condition, tenants were housed contrary to HUD's requirements, and Public Housing funds wer misspent.

What We Audited and Why We audited the Kankakee County Housing Authority's (Authority) Low-Rent Housing program. The audit was conducted in response to a citizen's complaint to our office and was part of our comprehensive audit of the Authority. The objective of our audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its Low-Rent Housing program in an efficient and effective manner.

What We Audited and Why We audited the Orange City Housing Authority's (Authority) Housing Choice Voucher program because a regional risk assessment ranked the Authority fifth on our list of potential public housing authority audits in New Jersey.