Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Greensboro Office
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Greensboro, NC, Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Greensboro Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Greensboro Office of Public Housing ensured that it performed the required reviews and did not release funds until all requirements…
July 14, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0004
Hillsborough County, FL Did Not Properly Administer Its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
We audited the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program administered by Hillsborough County, FL, as part of the activities in our 2013 fiscal year annual audit plan. We selected the County for review based on a complaint referral from the Office of Inspector General’s Office of Investigation on a public complaint alleging the County’s misuse of CDBG funds for the County’s cleanup events. Our audit objective was to determine…
July 09, 2014
Report
#2014-AT-1006
Monmouth County, NJ Expended Community Development Block Grant Funds for Eligible Activities, But Control Weaknesses Need To Be Strengthened.
We audited Monmouth County, NJ’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program based on a risk assessment that considered grantee funding, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) risk analysis, and prior Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit coverage. The objective of the audit was to determine whether County officials established and implemented adequate controls to provide assurance that CDBG funds were expended for…
July 02, 2014
Report
#2014-NY-1006
HUD Could Not Support the Reasonableness of the Operating and Capital Fund Programs’ Fees and Did Not Adequately Monitor Central Office Cost Centers
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) methodology and monitoring regarding the Office of Public Housing’s asset management fees and central office cost centers due to our concerns over potential misspending by public housing authorities and the lack of restrictions in the use of such funds. Our objective was to determine how HUD arrived at the asset management fee limits in its Public Housing Operating…
June 30, 2014
Report
#2014-LA-0004
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Columbia Office
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Columbia, SC Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Columbia Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Columbia Office ensured that it performed the required reviews and did not release funds until all requirements were met and required…
June 19, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0003
HUD Adequately Implemented and Monitored the HUD-VASH Program, But Changes Are Needed To Improve Lease Rates
We reviewed the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, (HUD), Office of Public and Indian Housing’s Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) program regarding HUD’s implementation and monitoring. We initiated our review because there had been no prior Office of Inspector General reviews of the HUD-VASH program. Our objective was to determine whether HUD’s implementation and monitoring of the program was adequate. …
June 18, 2014
Report
#2014-LA-0003
Financial and Administrative Weaknesses Existed in the Middlesex County, NJ, HOME Investment Partnerships Program
We audited Middlesex County, NJ’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program based on a risk analysis that considered funding, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) risk score, and prior Office of Inspector General audits. The audit objective was to determine whether County officials established and implemented adequate controls over their HOME program to ensure that program funds were expended and administered for…
June 10, 2014
Report
#2014-NY-1005
The County of San Bernardino, CA, Adequately Ensured That NSP Developer Fees Met HUD Requirements
We reviewed the developer fees the County of San Bernardino paid to its Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) developers. Our objective was to determine whether the County adequately ensured that NSP developer fees paid to its developers met HUD requirements. We performed our review to address questionable costs identified during a prior Office of Inspector General (OIG) review (audit report 2014-LA-0002). During that…
June 05, 2014
Report
#2014-LA-1003
The City of Huntsville Community Planning and Development Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnerships Program
We audited the City of Huntsville’s Community Development Department, which administers the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program, at the request of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Alabama Office of Community Planning and Development. Our objectives were to determine whether the Department’s commitment to use CDBG and HOME funds for the acquisition and rehabilitation…
May 29, 2014
Report
#2014-AT-1005
The City of Elmira, NY, Did Not Always Administer Its CDBG Program in Accordance with HUD Requirements
We audited the City of Elmira, NY’s administration of its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program based on our risk analysis and funding received by the City. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether the City (1) ensured that program activities were adequately documented and administered in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations, and (2) expended CDBG funds for eligible…
May 20, 2014
Report
#2014-NY-1004
The New York City Housing Authority, New York, NY, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With Regulations
We completed a review of the New York City Housing Authority’s administration of its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. We selected the Authority based on indicators from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) monitoring reports. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether the Authority administered its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program in accordance with HUD regulations and made housing…
May 01, 2014
Report
#2014-NY-1002
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, or Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund competitive grant. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
April 30, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1003
The County of Northumberland, Sunbury, PA, Did Not Administer Its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program Grant According to Recovery Act Requirements
We audited the County of Northumberland, PA’s Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program grant because the chairman of the Northumberland County board of commissioners requested that we audit the program. Our objective was to determine whether the County administered its program grant in accordance with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act requirements.
The County did not administer its program according to Recovery Act…
April 30, 2014
Report
#2014-PH-1004
The Yakama Nation Housing Authority Did Not Always Properly Spend Its Recovery Act funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited how the Yakama Nation Housing Authority used its nearly $4.9 million Native American Housing Block Grant provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority properly spent its Recovery Act funds, correctly obtained small purchases, and properly reported Recovery Act…
April 29, 2014
Report
#2014-SE-1002
Vieques Sports City Complex, Office of the Commissioner for Municipal Affairs, San Juan, PR, Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program
We audited the Office of the Commissioner for Municipal Affairs’ (OCMA) Puerto Rico State Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Section 108 Loan Guarantee program as part of our strategic plan, based on concerns regarding the slow progress of the Vieques sports complex project. The objective of this audit was to determine whether OCMA used Section 108 loan proceeds on a project that met a national objective of the CDBG program and…
March 20, 2014
Memorandum
#2014-AT-1801
CPD Did Not Monitor NSP Grantees’ Payments of Developer Fees to Developers
We reviewed the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, (HUD) Office of Community Planning and Development’s (CPD) monitoring of its Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) grantees’ incurred developer fees based on a prior external audit, which indicated that CPD field offices may not have provided adequate oversight of NSP grantees to ensure that for-profit developers did not incur questionable developer fees. Our objective…
March 10, 2014
Report
#2014-LA-0002
CPD Did Not Monitor Grantees' CPD-Funded Assets Transferred by Former Redevelopment Agencies To Minimize HUD's Risk
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) San Francisco and Los Angeles Offices of Community Planning and Development’s (CPD) monitoring of CPD-funded assets transferred by former redevelopment agencies due to concerns that CPD-funded assets may be lost during the State of California’s statewide mandated closure of redevelopment agencies. Our objective was to determine whether the San Francisco and Los…
February 27, 2014
Report
#2014-LA-0001
Final Action – Section 8 Landlord Settled Violations of the Housing Choice Voucher Program
We conducted a review of Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program payments made to Deandra Caison, a landlord, for a tenant residing in a property that Ms. Caison no longer owned. Ms. Caison had sold the property to her brother but continued to receive housing assistance payments. Between November 2007 and March 2010, Caison received $29,055 in housing assistance payments from the Orlando Housing Authority. To resolve the…
February 25, 2014
Memorandum
The Boston Office of Public Housing Did Not Provide Adequate Oversight of Environmental Reviews of Three Housing Agencies, Including Reviews Involving Recovery Act Funds
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Boston Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Boston Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Boston Office’s oversight of public housing environmental reviews within its jurisdiction ensured that (1) the responsible entities performed the…
February 06, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0001
The City of Kansas City, MO, Did Not Properly Obligate Its NSP1 Grant Funds and Allowed Its Subrecipient To Enter Into Contracts Without the Required Provisions
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited the City of Kansas City, MO’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program I (NSP I) based on previous problems in the City’s Community Development Block Grant program and the amount of funding it received. During fiscal year 2008, the City received more than $7.3 million in NSP1 funding. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the City…
February 04, 2014
Report
#2014-KC-1003