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…

We audited the Philadelphia, PA, Housing Authority’s use of public housing program operating funds because we received a complaint alleging that the Authority misused U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds.  Our objective was to determine whether allegations from the complaint had merit.  We focused the audit on whether the Authority properly procured (1) relocation services, (2) job training services, (3) a…

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.…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Easton, PA’s Housing Choice Voucher Program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority made improper payments to program participants and a consultant to the Authority inappropriately placed herself on the program waiting list and (2) we had never audited the Authority.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with…

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…

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…

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…

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…

We audited the Allegheny County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) the Authority received more than $27.3 million in Housing Choice Voucher funding in fiscal year 2011, (2) an article in the October 22, 2011, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette described housing quality standards problems with a housing unit participating in the Authority’s program, and (3) we had never audited the Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program. The…

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)…

We audited the Philadelphia Housing Authority’s compliance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) conflict-of-interest and financial disclosure requirements as a result of the Authority’s initial failure to comply with an Office of Inspector General (OIG) subpoena during a previous American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 audit. (HUD OIG audit report number 2011-PH-1010, “The Philadelphia Housing Authority,…

We audited the Allegheny County Housing Authority’s administration of its Public Housing Capital Fund grants that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. We selected the Authority for audit because it received a $7.7 million formula grant and three competitive grants totaling $5.8 million, which was the third largest formula grant and the second largest amount of capital fund competitive grants awarded in…

We audited the Philadelphia Housing Authority’s (Authority) use of its Public Housing Capital Fund formula grant that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). We selected the Authority for audit based on a citizen’s complaint alleging misuse of these funds and because it received $126.5 million in Recovery Act capital funds. We focused strictly on $31.5 million of the funds that the Authority…

We audited the Philadelphia Housing Authority’s (Authority) administration of its housing quality standards inspection program for its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program as part of our fiscal year 2010 audit plan. The audit objective addressed in this report was to determine whether the Authority ensured that its program units met the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) housing quality standards. The Authority did…

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,…

We audited the Harrisburg Housing Authority’s (Authority) administration of its Public Housing Capital Fund grant that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). We selected the Authority for audit because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded the Authority a $4.4 million formula grant. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered the grant funds…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Pottsville, PA’s (Authority) capital fund grant that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). On March 18, 2009, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded the Authority a $992,895 grant under the Recovery Act for its public housing capital fund program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its…

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…

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,…