The Pell City Housing Authority, Pell City, AL, Did Not Always Administer Its and the Ragland Housing Authority, Ragland, AL’s Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Pell City and Ragland Housing Authorities’ financial operations. We began our review of Pell City and Ragland because it aligns with a goal in our annual audit plan to improve the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) execution of and accountability for grant funds. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Pell City Housing Authority complied with HUD’s regulations regarding the management…
July 23, 2018
Report
#2018-AT-1009
The Mobile Housing Board Did Not Comply With HUD Regulations for Its Financial Operations
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…
August 04, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1010
The Huntsville Housing Authority Administered Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Huntsville Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. We initiated the audit under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) annual audit plan. We selected the Authority as part of a strategic plan with the Assistant United States Attorney in Northern Alabama to evaluate housing authorities in her jurisdiction. Our audit objective was to…
February 17, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Spartanburg, SC, Used HUD Program Funds for Ineligible Expenses
We audited the public housing program of the Housing Authority of the City of Spartanburg, SC, because of a citizen’s complaint. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority’s performance in the areas of financial operations, procurement, and inventory practices met HUD requirements.
The Authority used HUD program funds for ineligible or unsupported expenses, and failed to maintain an accurate accounting and financial control…
September 30, 2014
Report
#2014-AT-1016
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Columbia Office
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…
June 19, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0003
Corrective Action Verification Opelika Housing Authority Public Housing Programs
HUD OIG performed a corrective action verification of audit recommendations cited in the audit report, Opelika Housing Authority, Public Housing Programs (2004-AT-1011) issued July 23, 2004. The purpose of the corrective action verification was to determine whether the selected audit recommendations were implemented and the deficiencies cited in the report were corrected. The Authority implemented the necessary corrective action for the…
May 12, 2008
Memorandum
#2008-AT-0802
The Charleston Housing Authority, Charleston, South Carolina, Needs to Improve Controls Over Credit Card Use, Travel, and Petty Cash
May 02, 2007
Report
#2007-AT-1009