The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Did Not Adequately Manage Lead-Based Paint in Its Public Housing Units
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles’ management of lead-based paint and lead-based paint hazards in its public housing units. We selected the Authority based on our assessment of the risks of lead‐based paint in public housing agencies’ (PHA) housing developments, including the age of buildings, the number of units, household demographics, and reported cases of childhood lead poisoning. The audit objectives…
August 20, 2024
Report
#2024-CH-1003
The Los Angeles County Development Authority, Alhambra, CA, Generally Met HUD Goals and Requirements in Managing Its Family Self-Sufficiency Program
We audited the Los Angeles County Development Authority’s Family Self-Sufficiency Program due to a hotline complaint (HC-2019-4215) alleging that the Authority did not use its program funds in compliance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority met its program goals and objectives to assist eligible families in becoming self-sufficient and…
June 18, 2020
Report
#2020-LA-1004
The Housing Authority of the City of Long Beach, CA, Did Not Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City Long Beach’s Housing Choice Voucher Program based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Los Angeles Office of Public Housing due to concerns regarding its financial activity control weaknesses. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its Housing Choice Voucher Program in accordance with Program requirements, with an…
March 10, 2020
Report
#2020-LA-1002
The Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Charlottesville, VA, Did Not Always Comply With Applicable Procurement Requirements
We audited the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority’s use of public housing operating and capital funds because (1) we received a hotline complaint alleging that the Authority mismanaged its procurement activities and improperly awarded an internet services contract for more than $200,000 without receiving competitive bids and (2) we had never audited the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority…
August 02, 2019
Report
#2019-PH-1002
The Housing Authority of the County of San Diego, San Diego, CA, Executed and Administered Its Intergovernmental Agreement as Required
We audited the Housing Authority of the County of San Diego’s intergovernmental agreement due to the results of our completed internal auditability survey of public housing agencies with intergovernmental agreements. The auditability survey identified public housing authorities with intergovernmental agreements for potential external reviews due to a recent external audit the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (audit report…
July 15, 2019
Report
#2019-LA-1009
The Compton Housing Authority, Compton, CA, Did Not Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Compton Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher Program, based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Los Angeles Office of Public Housing, due to concerns regarding its financial activity control weaknesses. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its Housing Choice Voucher Program in accordance with program requirements, with an emphasis on…
July 11, 2019
Report
#2019-LA-1008
The Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles, Alhambra, CA, Did Not Ensure That Its Intergovernmental Agreements Included the Current HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles’ intergovernmental agreements due to our Public and Indian Housing Intergovernmental Agreements Auditability Survey. The objective of that review was to identify public housing agencies with intergovernmental agreements for potential external reviews due to a previous audit (audit report 2018-LA-1008), which identified the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles as not…
July 03, 2019
Report
#2019-LA-1006
The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Manage Its Legal Services in Compliance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of City of Los Angeles’ legal services due to a hotline complaint alleging that the Authority did not properly procure its legal services and alleging questionable legal expenses that violated U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority procured, contracted, and managed its legal services in compliance with HUD requirements…
September 27, 2018
Report
#2018-LA-1008
The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, CA, Generally Administered Its Rental Assistance Demonstration in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles’ Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) conversion to the Section 8 Project-Based Voucher Program. We selected the Authority because review of RAD conversions was aligned with the goals of our annual audit plan and the Authority’s conversion included previously environmentally toxic land that was recently remediated. The objective of our review was to determine whether the…
August 24, 2018
Report
#2018-LA-1007
The Chukchansi Indian Housing Authority, Oakhurst, CA, Did Not Always Follow HUD’s Requirements for Its Indian Housing Block Grant Program
We audited the Chukchansi Indian Housing Authority (Authority) Indian Housing Block Grant program due to a hotline complaint. The complaint alleged that the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians (tribe) had overstated tribal enrollment numbers to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), resulting in its tribally designated housing entity, the Chukchansi Indian Housing Authority, receiving more funding than it should…
August 24, 2017
Report
#2017-LA-1007
The Loudoun County Department of Family Services, Leesburg, VA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Loudoun County Department of Family Services’ Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) we received a complaint alleging housing quality standards problems with a housing unit participating in the County’s program, (2) the County had 688 vouchers and received more than $6.4 million in fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the County ensured that its Housing…
June 09, 2017
Report
#2017-PH-1004
The Inglewood Housing Authority, Inglewood, CA, Generally Ensured the Eligibility of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Participants
We audited the Inglewood Housing Authority (Authority) based upon issues with participant eligibility identified during our previous review of the financial operations of the Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program, audit report 2016-LA-1013. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that participants were eligible to receive housing assistance in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development…
May 11, 2017
Report
#2017-LA-1002
Inglewood Housing Authority, Inglewood, CA, Did Not Effectively Manage the Financial Operations of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Inglewood Housing Authority’s financial management of its Housing Choice Voucher program due to a hotline complaint allegation and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Los Angeles Office of Public Housing’s concerns about the Authority’s financial management of its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority managed the financial operations of its program in compliance with HUD…
September 30, 2016
Report
#2016-LA-1013
The Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Richmond, VA, Did Not Always Charge Eligible and Reasonable Central Office Cost Center Fees
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…
August 17, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1005
The Richmond Housing Authority, Richmond, CA, Mismanaged Its Financial Operations
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…
June 03, 2016
Report
#2016-LA-1006
The Orange County Housing Authority, Santa Ana, CA, Did Not Adequately Monitor Its Contractors' Performance of HUD's Housing Quality Standards Inspections
We audited the Orange County Housing Authority’s monitoring of its contractors’ performance of housing quality standards inspections of its mobility out units due to inadequacies identified in another review of the Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program’s housing quality standards. The Authority contracted out the administration and housing quality standards inspections for its mobility out housing units, Housing Choice Voucher…
May 13, 2016
Report
#2016-LA-1005
The Richmond Housing Authority, Richmond, CA, Did Not Always Procure Services and Manage Rents in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Richmond Housing Authority due to a complaint alleging that the Authority violated procurement requirements related to legal and accounting services and wrote off tenant debts improperly. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority procured goods and services and managed tenant rents for its public housing program in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements.…
April 28, 2016
Report
#2016-LA-1004
The Orange County Housing Authority, Santa Ana, CA, Did Not Always Ensure That Housing Units Met HUD’s Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Orange County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program’s housing quality standards primarily due to the Orange County district attorney’s investigation into allegations that Authority inspectors conducted personal business during the work day. These allegations resulted in concerns that inspections may not have been thorough to ensure housing units met HUD standards. Our objective was to determine whether…
April 21, 2016
Report
#2016-LA-1003
The Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Richmond, VA, Did Not Comply With HUD Requirements When Procuring Services
We audited the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority’s public housing program based on a request from the Office of Public Housing in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Richmond, VA, field office. The request was made after media inquiries noted possible fraud, waste, or abuse at the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with HUD procurement requirements.…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-PH-1008
The Fresno Housing Authority’s Procurement of Goods and Services Did Not Always Comply With HUD Regulations
We audited the Fresno Housing Authority due to a complaint alleging that the Authority steered contracts, did not seek competition for all of its required procurements, and did not maintain adequate supporting documentation. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority used its operating and capital funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements when procuring goods and…
September 11, 2015
Report
#2015-LA-1007