We reviewed the Housing Authority of the County of San Joaquin's (the Authority) capital fund program to determine whether it used capital funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules and regulations. The Authority did not use capital funds in accordance with requirements. Specifically, the Authority used $175,775 to absorb shared administrative costs of other housing programs, improperly charged $114,…

We audited HUD's controls over the FHA appraiser roster in response to a single-family loan origination audit that had raised concerns about FHA appraisers and appraisals. We reviewed HUD's appraiser roster (roster) to determine whether HUD's controls over the roster were adequate to ensure that only qualified/eligible appraisers were placed on the roster and whether the oversight and maintenance of the roster were sufficient to ensure that…

We audited Oneida Housing Authority (Authority) to determine whether the Authority calculated program income for NAHASDA-assisted 1937 Act properties in accordance with applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidance, regulations, and requirements and to observe uses of revenue from NAHASDA-assisted 1937 Act properties. The Authority failed to track Block Grant rehabilitation or capital expenses for each property and…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Schuyler Housing Authority (Authority) to determine whether the Authority improperly spent public housing assets when developing and operating an assisted living program. We found that the Authority inappropriately used more than $78,000 in public housing funds to pay expenses of a non-HUD assisted living program. In addition, the Authority…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Highland Park Housing Commission's (Commission) Public Housing and Public Housing Capital Fund programs (programs). The audit was part of the activities in our annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon its fiscal year 2005 independent auditor's report that identified it as having high-risk programs. Our objectives were to…

We reviewed the use of contract fee inspectors by the Office of Multifamily Housing Boston Hub (Boston Hub) as part of our 2007 annual audit plan. This review was initiated because U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) staff rely on contract fee inspectors to oversee the work of contractors performing renovation work on HUD-insured properties. Our objective was to determine whether the Boston Hub effectively used contract fee…

HUD OIG performed a corrective action verification of the audit recommendations cited in the audit report, Miami-Dade Housing Agency (Agency) Did Not Ensure Section 8-Assisted Units Met Housing Quality Standards (2006-AT-1001) issued December 21, 2005. The purpose of the corrective action verification was to determine if the selected audit recommendations were implemented and the deficiencies reported in the audit report corrected. The Agency…

HUD OIG reviewed the development activities of the Douglas County Housing Authority (Authority), Omaha, Nebraska, to determine whether the Authority encumbered or spent U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) assets for nonfederal development activities without HUD approval. The Authority inappropriately encumbered nearly $1.67 million in federal assets when it entered into loan documents containing setoff provisions against the…

We audited the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles’ (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority determined tenant eligibility and performed annual reexaminations in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. Although we did not identify any tenants that were not eligible for the program, the Authority did not comply with HUD’s requirements or its own administrative plan…

Based on a hotline complaint, we reviewed whether the Phoenix Apartments multifamily project located in Concord, California, used its project funds in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. We found that the project did not use project funds in accordance with the requirements of its regulatory agreement and applicable HUD rules and regulations. Specifically, during fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006, the project used $89,751 of its funds…

We audited the Anaheim Housing Authority’s (Authority) tenant eligibility and reexamination policies and procedures for its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations in determining tenant eligibility, rent calculations, and rent reasonableness. Although we did not identify any tenants that were not eligible for the Authority’s…

HUD OIG audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Quality Assurance Division because the results of some previous OIG audits indicated that the Quality Assurance Division might not have consistently followed its requirements. Our objective was to determine whether HUD's Quality Assurance Division consistently required Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-approved lenders to indemnify loans with similar material…

As part of HUD OIG's strategic plan, an audit was conducted of HUD's Atlanta Office of Public and Indian Housing oversight of the Housing Authority of DeKalb County's compliance with its memorandum of agreement. The primary objective was to determine whether Public Housing adequately monitored the Authority's implementation of operating improvements required in the agreement. Specifically, the objective was to determine whether Public Housing…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Akron Metropolitan Housing Authority's (Authority) 5(h) homeownership program (program). We selected the Authority based on a risk analysis showing that it may have improperly used program funds. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority properly accounted for and used its program's proceeds in accordance with requirements. The…

Based on a hotline complaint, we audited the Housing Authority of the City of McKinney (Authority). Our objective was to determine whether the Authority's transactions with its affiliated nonprofit, the McKinney Housing Opportunity Corporation (Corporation), complied with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. In violation of its annual contributions contract, the Authority inappropriately provided $915,487 in…

We audited the Housing Authority of Baltimore City's (Authority) administration of its leased housing under its Moving to Work Demonstration (Moving to Work) program. We conducted the audit based on our analysis of various risk factors relating to the housing authorities under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Baltimore field office. This is the first of two audit reports to be issued on the…

We completed an audit of Richard A. Hutchens and Associates (agent) pertaining to its management of the financial operations of Cayuga Village and Touraine Apartments. The objectives of our audit were to determine whether the agent used project funds in accordance with the regulatory agreement and HUD requirements. Specifically, to determine whether the agent (1) provided adequate documentation to support the reasonableness of payments made to…

As part of our strategic plan objective to assist the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) efforts to reduce rental assistance overpayments, we audited the portability features of the Dallas Housing Authority's (Authority) Housing Choice Voucher program. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered portability in accordance with HUD requirements. The Authority mismanaged its portable vouchers and failed…

In response to a hotline complaint, we reviewed the Housing Authority of the City of Napa's (the Authority) Section 8 program. The purpose was to determine whether concerns raised in the complaint relating to misappropriation of Section 8 funds had merit and whether allegations of improper rent increases for the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy (Mod Rehab) and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher programs were valid. We…