In accordance with our goal to review and ensure the proper administration of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds provided under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), we conducted a capacity review of the City of Meriden’s (City) operations. The City has responsibility for administering the State’s NSP. Our objective was to determine whether the City had the necessary capacity to effectively administer the State’s NSP…

As part of the Office of Inspector General’s annual audit plan, we completed a capacity review of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands’ (Department) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) funding. Our objective was to determine whether the Department had sufficient capacity to manage and administer its Recovery Act funding. Specifically, we reviewed and assessed the Department’s capacity in the following areas:…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General reviewed Wayne County’s (County) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). The review was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2009 annual audit plan. We selected the County based upon a request from HUD’s Detroit Office of Community Planning and Development. Our objective was to determine whether the County had the capacity to effectively and…

In accordance with our goal to review funds provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General conducted a capacity review of the City of East Cleveland’s (City) operations. We also selected the City based upon the results of our audit of the City’s Community Development Block Grant (Block Grant) and HOME Investment…

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control’s (OHHLHC) selection procedures used to award American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) grants. Our objective was to determine whether OHHLHC awarded (1) Recovery Act funds in accordance with the selection criteria specified in the fiscal year 2008 notices of funding availability (notices) and the Recovery Act and…

As part of our organization’s commitment to ensure the proper use of recovery funding, we performed a review of the City of Grand Prairie’s (City) operations to evaluate its capacity to administer the $3.2 million received under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). Specifically, our objective was to review and assess the City’s capacity and risks in the following…

As part of the Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) directive to determine whether safeguards exist to ensure that American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) funds are used for their intended purposes, we conducted a capacity review of the City San Antonio, TX (City) operations. Our objective was to determine whether the City had the capacity to account for Recovery Act funds and the controls to ensure that it expends…

We completed a capacity review of the County of Riverside’s (County) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the audit because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 reviews are part of the Office of the Inspector General’s annual audit plan and the program was identified as high risk. In addition, the County was awarded significant Program funds of $48.6 million. Our objective was to determine whether the County had…

As part of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) obligation to ensure accountability and transparency in the use of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) funds, we performed a capacity review to assess the City of Utica, New York’s (City) administration of its lead-based paint hazard control program. The City was awarded $2.04 million under the Recovery Act to carry out lead-based paint hazard control activities in…

We completed an audit of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program administered by the City of Paterson (City). Our audit objectives were to determine whether the City (1) disbursed CDBG funds efficiently and effectively in accordance with its submission to HUD and applicable rules and regulations and (2) had a financial management system in place to adequately safeguard the funds. The City did not always disburse CDBG funds efficiently…

We reviewed the County because it received more than $19 million in NSP funds and in 2008, HUD rated the County’s HOME program as high risk. Our objectives were to determine whether the County had the capacity to effectively and efficiently administer its NSP and whether it accurately reported HOME commitments within HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS). Based on the review, the County had the capacity to administer its…

In accordance with our goal to review and ensure the proper administration of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds provided under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) and/or the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), we conducted a capacity review of the operations of the State of Maine’s (State) Department of Economic and Community Development, Office of Community Development (Department). The…

The State of Arkansas (State) is scheduled to receive more than $15.67 million under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). As part of our organization’s commitment to ensure the proper use of Recovery Act funds, we reviewed the State’s controls and operations. Specifically, our objective was to determine whether the State has the capacity to account for Recovery Act funding and the controls to ensure that its…

The City of Atlanta (City) received a $12.3 million Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) grant from HUD that was authorized under Title III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act. Also, the City applied for an additional $57.9 million in NSP funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. We selected the City for review due to the amount of its NSP funding and because of performance concerns identified during our previous…

In accordance with our goal to review and ensure the proper administration of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds provided under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) and/or the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), we conducted a capacity review of the operations of the State of Vermont’s (State) Agency of Commerce and Community Development (Agency), which has responsibility for administering the State…

We audited the City of Los Angeles’ Community Development Department (City) as a result of problems noted during a prior audit involving activities administered by the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles (subrecipient). Our objective was to determine whether Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds were administered in accordance with HUD’s requirements for the CDBG program as they relate to a specific subrecipient…

Miami Dade County, Florida (County) was awarded $62.2 million in Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. HUD's Office of Inspector General (OIG) evaluated the County's capacity to administer its NSP funds. The OIG found that the County did not execute agreements between County departments, existing policies and procedures did not address NSP requirements, adequate supporting…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the City of Saginaw’s (City) Community Development Block Grant (Block Grant) program-funded demolition activities. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2009 annual audit plan. We selected the City based upon a request from HUD’s Detroit Office of Community Planning and Development. Our audit objective was to determine whether the…

We audited the City of Altoona, Pennsylvania’s (City), Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program based on a citizen complaint. Our audit objective was to determine if the City properly paid a subrecipient for eligible CDBG activities. We found that the City paid a subrecipient $914,335 for CDBG activities that it could not demonstrate were eligible. The City could not demonstrate that it paid a subreicipient for eligible activities that…