We initiated this audit as part of our annual audit plan to determine whether the State of Connecticut Department of Social Services (agency) properly administered its Housing Choice Voucher program (Voucher program) in compliance with its annual contributions contracts and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. Our objectives focused on whether tenant eligibility, rent determinations, and annual reexaminations were performed in accordance with HUD requirements and the associated housing assistance payments were adequately supported.

We audited the City of Hartford, Connecticut's (City) administration of its Housing Choice Voucher program (Voucher program) as part of our annual audit plan.

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Richmond’s (Authority) procurement activities. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority followed procurement requirements. We found that the Authority could not adequately support that procurement activities were conducted in accordance with applicable requirements. As a result, it could not demonstrate that contracts were awarded to vendors whose proposals were most advantageous to the Authority. We also found that the Authority had internal control weaknesses.

We audited the City of Baldwin Park Housing Authority’s (Authority) Housing Choice Voucher program. We conducted the audit because the Authority received a “near troubled” status and scores of zero on five Section Eight Management Assessment Program indicators for fiscal year 2007. The objective was to determine whether the Authority determined housing assistance payments correctly and completed annual reexaminations in a timely manner.

We audited the Culver City Housing Agency’s (Agency) administration of its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program waiting list and housing assistance payment calculations. We initiated this review based upon information we received regarding waiting list administration and potential tenant eligibility issues. The Agency’s ongoing lease-up deficiency and lack of monitoring visits by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) since 2004 were two other factors contributing to the audit.

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Long Beach’s (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The Authority was selected based on its having received low housing quality standards indicator scores for fiscal years 2006 and 2007 under HUD’s Section Eight Management Assessment Program in addition to a lack of recent on-site reviews by HUD. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority conducted housing quality standards inspections in accordance with HUD’s rules and regulations.

We completed a financial review of the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles' (Authority) Section 8 program. We initiated the review in response to several citizen complaints alleging mismanagement, waste, and abuse of U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Section 8 funding, including the use of Section 8 funds to pay the costs of non-Section 8 programs. Our objective was to determine the validity of the above allegations and to determine whether the Authority managed and spent its Section 8 funds in accordance with HUD rules and regulations.

We initiated this audit of the City of New London, Connecticut, Housing Authority (the Authority) as part of OIG’s initiative to evaluate public housing authority’s capability to administer the capital funds provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (The Recovery Act). The Authority has had significant management deficiencies for more than ten years and HUD identified the Authority as “overall troubled” in May of 2004.

The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Authority of the City of Brush, Colorado (Authority) because we received information indicating there were irregularities in the Authority's procurement process. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority performed contracting activities in accordance with federal procurement requirements. The Authority did not perform contracting activities in accordance with federal procurement requirements.

We performed a capital fund administrative capacity review of the Housing Authority of the City of Eloy (Authority) because, despite the Authority’s persistent management problems, HUD awarded the Authority a Public Housing Capital Fund grant of $113,672 under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act).