The Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority, Buffalo, NY, Needs To Improve Its Management of the Commodore Perry Homes Development To Address Longstanding Concerns
We audited the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority’s management of its Commodore Perry Homes development. We selected the Authority based on congressional interest. Half of the development’s buildings were demolished more than 20 years ago, and the majority of the remaining buildings and units have been vacant for years without redevelopment activity. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority properly…
January 11, 2022
Report
#2022-NY-1001
New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, New York, NY, Did Not Always Ensure That Units Met Housing Quality Standards but Generally Abated Payments When Required
We audited the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development’s (HPD) Housing Choice Voucher Program. We selected HPD for review based on its size and because we had not conducted an audit of its Housing Choice Voucher Program. The objective of the audit was to determine whether HPD ensured that its program units met HUD’s housing quality standards and whether it abated housing assistance payments when required.…
August 02, 2019
Report
#2019-NY-1003
The Greensboro Housing Authority, Greensboro, NC, Generally Administered Its Rental Assistance Demonstration Conversion in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Greensboro Housing Authority’s Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) conversion. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its RAD conversion in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. Specifically, we wanted to determine whether the Authority (1) executed appropriate written agreements, (2) ensured that project financing sources were secured…
May 10, 2018
Report
#2018-AT-1004
The New Brunswick Housing Authority, NJ, Did Not Always Administer Its Operating and Capital Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the New Brunswick Housing Authority because it was classified as a troubled public housing agency and based on our risk analysis of public housing agencies located in the State of New Jersey. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its operating and capital funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements.
We found that the Authority did not…
September 28, 2017
Report
#2017-NY-1013
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 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 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 Freeport Housing Authority, Freeport, NY, Did Not Administer Its Low-Rent Housing and Homeownership Programs in Accordance With HUD’s Regulations
We completed a review of the Freeport Housing Authority’s administration of its low-rent housing and homeownership programs. We selected the Authority due to a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) New York Office of Public and Indian Housing officials. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its low-rent housing and homeownership programs in accordance with…
November 30, 2014
Report
#2015-NY-1002
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
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 Housing Authority of the City of Lumberton, NC, Did Not Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With Requirements
We initiated a review of the Housing Authority of the City of Lumberton, NC, at the request of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Greensboro, NC, Office of Public Housing. HUD staff described many areas of concern, including cash management, procurement, and inventory controls. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD and other Federal…
December 04, 2013
Report
#2014-AT-1002
The Buffalo, NY, Municipal Housing Authority Did Not Always Administer Its Recovery Act Capital Fund Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority’s Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (Formula) program funded under the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 based on an Office of Inspector General risk analysis and the amount of funding the Authority received. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether Authority officials (1) procured contracts in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)…
September 12, 2012
Report
#2012-NY-1012
The Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina Did Not Follow Some Requirements for Its Native American Housing Block Grants Received Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
We selected the tribe for audit because it received a $4.7 million formula grant and a $4 million competitive grant, the largest Native American Housing Block Grants awarded in North Carolina under the Recovery Act. Our objective was to determine whether the tribe administered its Native American Housing Block Grants in compliance with Recovery Act and other applicable requirements, specifically, whether it had (1) expended funds on a timely…
December 05, 2011
Report
#2012-AT-1003
The Greensboro Housing Authority Needs To Improve Internal Controls for Administering Recovery Act Funds
We audited the Greensboro Housing Authority (Authority) as part of our annual plan to review public housing capital funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). The Authority received a $5.6 million Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act Funded grant, the second highest in the State. It also received a Recovery Act funded $1.05 million capital fund competitive grant for addressing…
July 21, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1013
The Housing Authority, City of Wilson, NC, Mismanaged Its Section 8 Program
HUD OIG audited the Housing Authority of the City of Wilson’s (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. We elected to perform the audit after finding indicators of Section 8 deficiencies during our review of the Authority’s capacity to administer capital funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Audit Report 2010-AT-1007). Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority complied with U.S.…
January 13, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1003
The Housing Authority, City of Wilson, NC, Lacked the Capacity To Effectively Administer Recovery Act Funds
We reviewed the Housing Authority of the City of Wilson (Authority) because it was granted $9.2 million for Public Housing Capital Fund projects (capital funds) under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). In addition, we received a citizen’s complaint alleging that the Authority used unethical procurement practices and did not plan to use Recovery Act funds effectively. Our objectives were to evaluate the Authority…
July 27, 2010
Report
#2010-AT-1007
The Rochester Housing Authority, Rochester, NY, Had Financial Control Weaknesses That Could Affect Its Capacity to Administer Recovery Act Funds
We performed a capacity review to assess the Rochester Housing Authority’s (Authority) administration of its capital funding program. The Authority was awarded $5.9 million in capital funds under the Recovery Act. Our review determined that the Authority had weaknesses in its financial controls that if left unaddressed could lead to its having a diminished capacity to effectively administer its supplemental Recovery Act funds. Specifically,…
June 04, 2010
Memorandum
#2010-NY-1804
The Rochester Housing Authority, Rochester, NY, Had Financial Control Weaknesses That Could Affect Its Capacity to Administer Recovery Act Funds
June 04, 2010
Memorandum
#2010-NY-1804
New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority, New Rochelle, NY, Had Weaknesses in Its Self-Sufficiency Grant Programs
We audited the New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority’s (Authority) administration of its Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) and Housing Choice Voucher Family Self-Sufficiency grant programs as part of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) strategic plan goals to improve the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) fiscal accountability for its assisted housing programs. The audit objectives were to determine…
April 07, 2010
Report
#2010-NY-1011
The New York City Housing Authority Had the Capacity to Administer Capital Funds Provided Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment
We performed a review of the New York City Housing Authority’s (Authority) capacity to administer the approximately $423 million in capital funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) in support of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) goal to report on Recovery Act recipients’ capacity to administer funds received. The objective of the review was to determine whether the Authority’s general,…
March 11, 2010
Memorandum
#2010-NY-1803