The Stark Metropolitan Housing Authority, Canton, OH, Did Not Always Comply With Federal and Its Own Procurement Requirements
We audited the Stark Metropolitan Housing Authority’s public housing program based on significant deficiencies noted during our prior audit of the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with Federal and its own requirements for procuring goods and services.The Authority did not always comply with Federal and its own procurement requirements. Specifically, for the contracts reviewed, it did not always…
May 24, 2023
Report
#2023-CH-1002
The Housing Authority of the City of Springfield, MA, Did Not Always Comply With Procurement and Contract Administration Requirements
We audited the Springfield Housing Authority’s Public Housing Operating Fund and Capital Fund programs because the Authority ranked fifth highest on our risk assessment of Massachusetts public housing agencies and is the third largest in the State. In addition, we had not audited the Authority in more than 10 years. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority complied with procurement and contract administration…
March 19, 2020
Report
#2020-BO-1002
PK Management, LLC, Richmond Heights, OH, Did Not Always Maintain Documentation Required to Support Housing Assistance Payments
We audited PK Management, LLC, based on (1) media coverage of problems associated with Essex Village, an apartment complex in Virginia that it managed, and (2) issues identified in our prior audit of PK Management in Birmingham, AL. Our audit objective was to determine whether PK Management assisted eligible tenants and maintained documentation to support the housing assistance payments it received for residents of the properties it…
August 02, 2019
Report
#2019-PH-1003
The Columbus Metropolitan Housing Authority, Columbus, OH, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Public Housing Operating and Capital Fund Programs
We audited the Columbus Metropolitan Housing Authority’s Public Housing Operating and Capital Fund programs based on an anonymous complaint to our hotline. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its programs in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) requirements.
The Authority invested Federal funds in non-HUD-approved investment accounts and did not properly record…
September 18, 2018
Report
#2018-CH-1006
The Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority, Cleveland, OH, Generally Administered Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority’s public housing program based on an anonymous complaint to our hotline. Our objective was specific to the allegations in the complaint and was to determine whether the Authority (1) engaged in nepotism when hiring staff, (2) used program funds for inappropriate or unreasonable travel expenses, (3) failed to comply with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and…
August 28, 2018
Report
#2018-CH-1004
The Youngstown Metropolitan Housing Authority, Youngstown, OH, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Youngstown Metropolitan Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program based on the activities included in our 2016 annual audit plan and our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority appropriately managed its Family Self-Sufficiency program and Housing Choice Voucher program files in accordance with the U.S.…
July 07, 2017
Report
#2017-CH-1002
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
The Adams Metropolitan Housing Authority, Manchester, OH, Generally Used Public Housing Program Funds in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Adams Metropolitan Housing Authority’s public housing program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) management. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority used public housing program funds in accordance with HUD’s and its own requirements.
The Authority generally used…
July 31, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1005
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 Stark Metropolitan Housing Authority, Canton, OH, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audited the Stark Metropolitan Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Public Housing Capital Fund stimulus formula grant as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon risk factors related to the housing agencies in Region 5’s Region 5 includes the States of Illinois,…
September 27, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-1011
Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority, Cleveland, OH, Did Not Operate Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program According to HUD’s Requirements
We audited the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with applicable U.S. Department of Housing and…
March 29, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-1006
The Gallia Metropolitan Housing Authority, Bidwell, OH, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance with Recovery Act and HUD Requirements
We audited the Gallia Metropolitan Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) grant. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V’s (see footnote 1) jurisdiction and a request by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
January 25, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-1001
The Springfield Metropolitan Housing Authority, Springfield, OH, Did Not Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act and HUD Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Springfield Metropolitan Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act Funded grant. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority for audit based on the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) commitment to ensure…
September 30, 2011
Report
#2011-CH-1015
Weymouth Housing Authority, Weymouth, MA, Did Not Always Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program and Public Housing Program in Accordance With HUD Regulations and Its Annual Contributions Contracts
We audited the Housing Choice Voucher program and Federal public housing programs at the Weymouth Housing Authority as part of our annual audit plan. The overall objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority had acceptable management practices to efficiently and effectively administer its Housing Choice Voucher program while providing decent, safe, and sanitary housing in compliance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
August 29, 2011
Report
#2011-BO-1009
Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority, Cleveland, OH, Did Not Operate Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program According to HUD's Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority’s (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the…
July 28, 2011
Report
#2011-CH-1011
PIH's Monitoring of Recovery Act Capital Fund Grantees in Region 1
We audited the monitoring conducted by the Office of Public Housing (PIH), in Region 1 of their Recovery Act Capital Fund Grantees, for compliance with the Recovery Act and applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations, policies and procedures.
Our objective was to determine whether PIH in Region 1 (1) monitored Recovery Act grantees identified by the risk assessment process HUD established and implemented for…
May 13, 2011
Report
#2011-BO-0001
The New Bedford Housing Authority, New Bedford, MA, Generally Administered Its Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus Formula and Competitive Grants (Recovery Act Funded) in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
We audited the New Bedford Housing Authority’s (Authority) $9.9 million of the Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus Formula and Competitive Grants (Recovery Act Funded). Our objective was to determine whether the Authority obligated and disbursed capital funds received under the Recovery Act according to the requirements of the act and applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules and regulations.
The Authority…
March 02, 2011
Report
#2011-BO-1006
The Lake Metropolitan Housing Authority, Painesville, OH, Needs To Improve Its Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Progr
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Lake Metropolitan Housing Authority’s (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The Authority was selected for audit based upon a congressional request from the Honorable Steven C. LaTourette. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with HUD’s requirements and its program…
September 30, 2010
Report
#2010-CH-1015
The Boston, MA, Housing Authority Generally Administered Its Capital Fund Recovery Grant as Required
We audited the Boston, MA, Housing Authority (Authority) because it was awarded more than $33 million in Capital Fund Recovery Grant funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) and obligated the majority of the grant shortly before the required obligation deadline. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) obligated the capital fund grant funds it received under the Recovery Act for eligible…
September 27, 2010
Report
#2010-BO-1010
The State of Massachusetts, Department of Housing and Community Development, Boston, MA Properly Administered Its Section 8 Project Based Voucher Program
We audited the Section 8 Project-Based Voucher program operated by the State of Massachusetts, Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), as part of our annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the DHCD properly administered its Project-Based Voucher program in compliance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. The DHCD generally administered its program in compliance with HUD…
December 16, 2009
Report
#2010-BO-1003