The Irvington, NJ, Housing Authority Did Not Always Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With Program Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the Township of Irvington, NJ, regarding the administration of its public housing program because it was classified as a troubled public housing agency and based on a complaint from the union representing its maintenance and clerical employees. The complaint alleged serious financial and operational mismanagement. The audit objectives were to determine whether the issues identified in the…
March 09, 2017
Report
#2017-NY-1008
The New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority, New Rochelle, NY, Did Not Always Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With HUD’s Rules and Regulations
We completed a review of the New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority’s administration of its public housing program. We selected the Authority based on a management request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) New York Office of Public Housing. The Authority was designated as a troubled housing authority and had indicators of noncompliance with program requirements, such as using program funds to pay…
January 30, 2017
Report
#2017-NY-1006
The Lubbock Housing Authority, Lubbock, TX, Had Weaknesses in Managing Its Capital Fund Program Operations
We audited the Lubbock Housing Authority’s Public Housing Capital Fund program as part of our regional audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority properly implemented its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Capital Fund program.
The Authority generally implemented its Capital Fund program in compliance with HUD requirements and undertook work consistent with its annual and 5-year plans. …
December 11, 2016
Report
#2017-FW-1001
The Broward County Housing Authority, Lauderdale Lakes, FL, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Broward County Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2016 annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own requirements.
The Authority did not always comply with HUD’s requirements and its own administrative policies…
September 30, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1014
Inglewood Housing Authority, Inglewood, CA, Did Not Effectively Manage the Financial Operations of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Inglewood Housing Authority’s financial management of its Housing Choice Voucher program due to a hotline complaint allegation and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Los Angeles Office of Public Housing’s concerns about the Authority’s financial management of its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority managed the financial operations of its program in compliance with HUD…
September 30, 2016
Report
#2016-LA-1013
The Alphabet Group, LLC, Marks Group, LLC, and Imagineers, Inc., Settled Allegations Related to Section 8 Rent Certifications
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), assisted the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut in the civil investigation of The Alphabet Group, LLC, Marks Group, LLC, and Imagineers, Inc. Alphabet and Marks are owners of residential housing in Hartford, CT, and Imagineers administers the Section 8 program for the City of Hartford Housing Authority.
On May 17, 2012, an…
September 19, 2016
Memorandum
#2016-CF-1807
The Sanford Housing Authority, Sanford, NC, Did Not Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Sanford Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Programs as a result of problems identified during a technical assistance review performed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing. Additionally, our audit is in keeping with our annual audit plan to ensure that public housing agencies sufficiently administer HUD’s programs in accordance with…
September 13, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1013
The Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, MD, Did Not Always Administer Its Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency Program in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis’ Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) program due to a hotline complaint. The complaint alleged that the Authority used ROSS grant funds to pay a resident who did not work on a grant. This is the first of two audit reports on the Authority. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its ROSS program in accordance with applicable U.S…
August 31, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1006
The Alton Housing Authority, Alton, IL, Improperly Phased In Flat Rents for Its Public Housing Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited the Alton Housing Authority because it appeared to have flat rents set at a rate below 80 percent of the fair market rent in that area based on the information available in the Public and Indian Housing Information Center system. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with HUD’s flat rent requirements.
The Authority did…
May 19, 2016
Report
#2016-KC-1004
The Huntsville Housing Authority Administered Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Huntsville Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. We initiated the audit under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) annual audit plan. We selected the Authority as part of a strategic plan with the Assistant United States Attorney in Northern Alabama to evaluate housing authorities in her jurisdiction. Our audit objective was to…
February 17, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1003
The Lansing Housing Commission, Lansing, MI, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Lansing Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction and the activities included in our 2015 annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Commission (1) appropriately calculated housing assistance payments, (2) maintained eligibility documentation required to support the…
December 15, 2015
Report
#2016-CH-1002
The Anderson Housing Authority Mismanaged Its Public Housing Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Office of Inspector General audited the Anderson Housing Authority in Anderson, MO’s participation in HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements.
The Authority did not operate its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements.…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1010
The Lanagan Housing Authority Mismanaged Its Public Housing Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Office of Inspector General audited the Lanagan Housing Authority in Lanagan, MO’s participation in HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements.
The Authority did not operate its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements. …
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1011
The Pineville Housing Authority Mismanaged Its Public Housing Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) - Office of Inspector General audited the Pineville Housing Authority in Pineville, MO’s participation in HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD requirements.
The Authority did not operate its public housing program in accordance with HUD…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1009
The Housing Authority of the City of Durham, NC, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Durham’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on a hotline citizen complaint and as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own requirements and whether the complaint was valid.
The Authority…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-1011
The Housing Authority of the City of South Bend, IN, Did Not Always Comply with HUD Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of South Bend, IN’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction and the activities included in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) correctly calculated and paid housing assistance and utility allowances, (2) obtained and…
September 25, 2015
Report
#2015-CH-1008
The Jefferson Metropolitan Housing Authority, Steubenville, OH, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Files Complied With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Jefferson Metropolitan Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the activities included in our 2015 annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) appropriately calculated housing assistance payments, (2) maintained required eligibility documentation to support the admission and…
September 09, 2015
Report
#2015-CH-1004
HUD Did Not Complete an Adequate Front-End Risk Assessment for the Rental Assistance Demonstration
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Rental Assistance Demonstration. We initiated the audit under the HUD Office of Inspector General’s annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether HUD had adequate controls over the Demonstration, to include (1) an appropriate completion of a risk assessment that adequately evaluated the following risks: (a) the need for additional administrative…
September 03, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-0003
Brown County Housing Authority, Green Bay, WI, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Files Complied With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Brown County Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction and the activities included in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) appropriately calculated housing assistance payments and (2) maintained required eligibility documentation…
August 28, 2015
Report
#2015-CH-1003
The Hot Springs Housing Authority, Hot Springs, AR Did Not Comply With Federal Regulations and Other Requirements When Administering Its Public Housing Programs
In accordance with our regional plan to review public housing programs and because of a complaint filed by a contractor with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and issues identified by HUD’s Office of Public Housing, we performed a review of the Hot Springs Housing Authority. The contractor alleged that the Authority did not procure a contract in compliance with Federal…
August 14, 2015
Memorandum
#2015-FW-1807