The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development – Office of Inspector General audited the Nevada, MO Housing Authority because available reports indicated that 95.4 percent of the Authority’s public housing tenants were exempt from the community service and self-sufficiency requirement (requirement), which was higher than the State’s average of 88.5 percent.  Also, this audit will complement our upcoming nationwide internal audit of…

We conducted a review of Home Forward (previously named the Housing Authority of Portland, OR) based on concerns noted during our ongoing internal audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) oversight of public housing authorities’ compliance with Federal lobbying disclosure requirements.  Our review objective was to determine whether Home Forward complied with Federal lobbying disclosure requirements and…

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) process for awarding asset repositioning fees (ARF) to public housing agencies (PHA) with approved demolition and dispostion projects.  We initiated this review based upon issues disclosed during our review of Public Housing Capital Fund program grants to PHAs with approved demolition and dispostion projects.  The audit objective was to determine whether HUD had…

We audited the Jackson Housing Commission’s Section 8 program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan.  We selected the Commission based on our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction.  Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its program in accordance with HUD’s and its own program requirements. The Commission generally…

In accordance with our regional plan to review public housing programs and because of weaknesses identified by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), we reviewed the public housing programs of the South Landry Housing Authority, Grand Coteau, LA.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its HUD public housing programs in accordance with regulations and guidance. The Authority did not comply…

We audited HUD’s Office of Native American Programs’ (ONAP) Indian Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG) program grant closeout process based on data received from Southwest ONAP and additional analysis that raised concerns regarding ONAP’s oversight of the grant closeout process.  Our objective was to determine whether ONAP had adequate controls to ensure the timely closeout of program grants. HUD’s ONAP did not have adequate controls…

We performed an audit of the Boca Raton Housing Authority mainly to assess the validity of nine allegations made against the Authority.  The primary audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program tenant files in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s regulations, specifically to verify the validity of the complaint. Four of the nine…

We audited the Goshen Housing Authority’s Section 8 program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan.  We selected the Authority based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Indianapolis Office of Public and Indian Housing.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with HUD’s and its own requirements.  The…

In accordance with our regional plan to review public housing programs and because of weaknesses identified during a prior audit by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General (OIG), we reviewed the public housing programs of the Kenner Housing Authority in Kenner, LA.  Our overall objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its public housing programs in accordance with…

In accordance with our regional plan to review public housing programs and as part of our overall risk strategy to review smaller housing authorities, we reviewed the Housing Authority of the City of Beeville, TX.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing and related grant programs in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) requirements.  However, we limited…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, to address complaints and areas that came to our attention during a prior audit.  Our objective was determine whether costs charged to Federal housing programs were eligible, reasonable, and supported.  Specifically, we determined whether officials properly (1) charged development staff costs, (2) charged Section 8 consulting costs, (3) implemented flat rents, (4) loaned…

We audited the Adams Metropolitan Housing Authority’s public housing program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan.  We selected the Authority based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) management.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority used public housing program funds in accordance with HUD’s and its own requirements. The Authority generally used…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Northeast Oregon Housing Authority.  We selected the Authority because we received a hotline complaint expressing several concerns about the Authority’s procurement, asset disposal, payroll withholdings, maintenance charge rates, and tenant commissioner housing issues.  Our objective was to determine whether the allegations in hotline…

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…

We audited the Moline Housing Authority’s Section 8 program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 annual audit plan.  We selected the Authority based on a citizen’s complaint to our office.  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. The Authority did not always comply with HUD’s…

We audited the Niagara Falls Housing Authority’s HOPE VI grant program 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 the Authority administered its HOPE VI grant program and activities in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and HOPE VI grant program requirements. The Authority did not always…

We audited the White Mountain Apache Housing Authority’s Indian Housing Block Grant (IHBG).  We conducted the audit primarily due to concerns raised by HUD’s Southwest Office of Native American Programs regarding the Authority’s financial management practices.  The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority used its IHBG funds in accordance with HUD requirements. The Authority failed to use its IHBG funds in…

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) methodology and monitoring regarding the Office of Public Housing’s asset management fees and central office cost centers due to our concerns over potential misspending by public housing authorities and the lack of restrictions in the use of such funds.  Our objective was to determine how HUD arrived at the asset management fee limits in its Public Housing Operating…

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Columbia, SC Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews.  We selected the Columbia Office based on our risk assessment.  Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Columbia Office ensured that it performed the required reviews and did not release funds until all requirements were met and required…

We reviewed the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, (HUD), Office of Public and Indian Housing’s Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) program regarding HUD’s implementation and monitoring.  We initiated our review because there had been no prior Office of Inspector General reviews of the HUD-VASH program.  Our objective was to determine whether HUD’s implementation and monitoring of the program was adequate. …