We audited the City and County of Honolulu’s (City) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.  We conducted the audit because the City was the largest Pacific island recipient of CDBG funds, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had identified problems with the City’s CDBG program, and the Office of Inspector General had never audited the City.  Our objective was to determine whether the City administered…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Muncie’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 administered its program in accordance with HUD’s and its own requirements. The Authority did not always administer its program in…

We audited the City of Pasadena’s Community Development Block Grant program due to performance issues identified by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Los Angeles Office of Community Planning and Development.  Our objective was to determine whether the City administered its program in accordance with applicable HUD rules and requirements.  Specifically, we wanted to determine whether its projects complied…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Authority of the County of Salt Lake Public Housing Capital Fund grants for fiscal years 2011-2014.  We initiated this audit due to the amount of funding the Authority received during our review period.  The Authority is the highest funded public housing agency in the State of Utah.  The objective of our audit was to…

We audited the fees that the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority charged to its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) housing programs for central office cost center services based on issues identified during our prior audit of the Authority.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority charged fees to its HUD housing programs for central office cost center services that were eligible, reasonable, and…

We audited the Somerville Housing Authority’s public housing and Public Housing Capital Fund programs as part of our fiscal year 2016 regional audit plan.  We initiated our review because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Boston Office of Public and Indian Housing had not monitored the programs in the past 5 years and we had not audited the Authority in the past 10 years.  Our audit objectives were to…

We audited the Rochester Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program to address our goal to contribute to improving the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) execution of its fiscal responsibilities.  We selected this auditee based on a risk analysis of public housing agencies administered by the HUD Buffalo field office, which considered, among other factors, funds received and the number of program housing units…

We audited the Mobile Housing Board’s financial operations.  We selected the Housing Board based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Alabama State Office of Public Housing, following a Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) financial assessment of the Housing Board for fiscal years 2009 to 2013.  The REAC assessment showed that the Housing Board’s financial condition had deteriorated over those…

We audited the Jefferson Metropolitan Housing Authority’s public housing program based on the activities included in our 2016 annual audit plan and a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with (1) Federal and its own procurement requirements and (2) HUD’s requirements for the administration of its energy performance contract.  The…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Anderson’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 administered its program in accordance with HUD’s and its own requirements. The Authority did not always administer its program in…

We audited the Sanford Housing Authority’s procurement and financial operations.  We selected the Authority based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing, following a technical assistance review performed. The technical assistance review identified issues with the Authority’s procurement practices and financial operations, among other items.  The…

We audited the Muscogee (Creek) Nation’s use of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds in accordance with the Office of Inspector General’s goal to ensure the integrity and soundness of HUD’s Public and Indian Housing programs and to follow up on weaknesses identified in other reviews.  The audit objective was to determine whether the Nation complied with HUD requirements when it housed families and procured contracts…

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Community Development Block Grant program’s property acquisition and disposition activities.  We conducted the audit as part of our annual audit plan.  Our audit objective was to determine whether HUD had adequate oversight of property acquisition and disposition activities under its Block Grant program.  HUD did not always provide adequate oversight of…

We audited the State of Indiana’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program.  The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan.  We selected the State because it received the most program funds under the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act of 2009 in Region 5’s1  jurisdiction.  Our objectives were to determine whether the State’s Office…

We audited the State of Connecticut’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) based on the amount of NSP1 funding received.  The State received more than $25 million in NSP1 funds in program year 2009, making it the second highest funded State in New England, and had not recently been audited by the Office of Inspector General.  Our overall audit objective was to determine whether State officials administered the State’s NSP in…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, in response to complaints about improper use of funds, procurement irregularities, and inadequate safeguarding of equipment.  The audit objective was to determine whether Federal funds were used for eligible and adequately supported costs, procurements were executed in compliance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations, and the Authority had…

We audited the City of Miami Beach’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program in accordance with our annual audit plan because it had projects overseen by the same administration questioned in our audit of the City’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program. In addition, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Miami Office of Community Planning and Development ranked the City as high risk in its 2015 risk assessment. Our…

We audited the City of Miami Beach’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program, in accordance with our annual audit plan, because (1) the Miami U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Community Planning and Development ranked the City as high risk in its 2015 risk assessment and (2) HUD’s onsite monitoring review identified concerns with the City’s administration of the HOME program.  Our objective was to determine…

We audited the Richmond Housing Authority due to a complaint alleging that the Authority submitted falsified documentation to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and allowed the City of Richmond to use the Authority’s HUD funds and the Authority’s assets and that the City charged the Authority for rent and services at an unreasonable price.  Our audit objective was to validate complaint allegations regarding whether…

In accordance with our audit plan to review public housing programs, we reviewed the Housing Authority of Fort Worth, TX.  Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) properly administered its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Housing Choice Voucher program and (2) properly used HUD funds and resources for a related entity, FW Hunter Plaza, LP.  With minor exceptions, the Authority generally…