The Taylor Housing Commission, Taylor, MI, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements for Its Program Household Files
We audited the Taylor Housing Commission’s Housing Choice Voucher Program based on our analysis of risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction (States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin). Our audit objective was to determine whether the Commission complied with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own requirements regarding the administration of its…
September 30, 2019
Report
#2019-CH-1004
The Fort Collins Housing Authority, Fort Collins, CO, Administered Its RAD Project in Accordance With HUD Requirements for the Items Reviewed
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Fort Collins Housing Authority’s Village on Redwood Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) project. We selected the Authority because it had completed the entire RAD conversion process with new construction, and its Village on Redwood RAD project used the largest amount of Federal funds of the State of Colorado projects. Our…
April 18, 2019
Report
#2019-DE-1002
The Detroit Housing Commission, Detroit, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Moderate Rehabilitation Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Detroit Housing Commission’s Moderate Rehabilitation program based on concerns regarding the conditions of the housing units and the results of our prior audit of the Commission’s former projects. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2018 annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
February 06, 2019
Report
#2019-CH-1002
The Grand Rapids Housing Commission, Grand Rapids, MI, Did Not Always Correctly Calculate and Pay Housing Assistance for Units Converted Under the Rental Assistance Demonstration
We audited the Grand Rapids Housing Commission’s Rental Assistance Demonstration program (RAD) based on the activities included in our 2017 annual audit plan and our analysis of the housing agencies participating in RAD in Region 5’s jurisdiction (States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin). Our audit objective was to determine whether the Commission correctly calculated housing assistance payments for the units…
June 11, 2018
Report
#2018-CH-1001
The Denver Housing Authority Generally Complied with HUD’s and its Own Procurement Regulations
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Denver Housing Authority of Denver, CO for calendar years 2013-2015. The audit was initiated because of deficiencies found in other procurement audits in our region. The Authority is the largest recipient of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds in the region, and we wanted to ensure that it did not have the…
August 18, 2017
Report
#2017-DE-1002
The Port Huron Housing Commission, Port Huron, MI, Did Not Properly Implement Asset Management
We audited the Port Huron Housing Commission’s public housing program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2016 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based on our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s 1 jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and…
January 23, 2017
Report
#2017-CH-1001
The Lansing Housing Commission, Lansing, MI, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Lansing Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction and the activities included in our 2015 annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Commission (1) appropriately calculated housing assistance payments, (2) maintained eligibility documentation required to support the…
December 15, 2015
Report
#2016-CH-1002
The Detroit Housing Commission, Detroit, MI, Did Not Always Manage Its Program Projects in Accordance With HUD’s Requirements
We audited the Detroit Housing Commission’s Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon a citizen’s complaint alleging mismanagement in the administration of the Commission’s former program projects, Colony Arms and Fisher Arms Apartments. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Commission appropriately (1) maintained…
August 26, 2015
Report
#2015-CH-1002
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Detroit Office
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Detroit Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Detroit Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Detroit Office’s oversight of public housing environmental reviews within its jurisdiction ensured that (1) the responsible entities performed…
September 24, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0005
The Pontiac Housing Commission, Pontiac, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Pontiac Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission complied with Federal, State, or its own requirements regarding its Family Self-Sufficiency program and conflicts of interest.
The Commission did not always administer its Family Self-Sufficiency…
September 12, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1009
The Ferndale Housing Commission, Ferndale, MI, Generally Administered Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Household Files in accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Ferndale Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon an analysis of risk factors related to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objectives were to determine whether the Commission appropriately (1) calculated housing assistance payments, (2) maintained required…
September 11, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1008
The Jackson Housing Commission, Jackson, MI, Needs To Improve Its Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
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…
August 29, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1007
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, or Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund competitive grant. We selected the Commission based upon 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 grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
April 30, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1003
The Jefferson County Housing Authority, Wheat Ridge, CO, Did Not Properly Use Its Disposition Sales Proceeds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Jefferson County Housing Authority (Authority) based on concerns that there were irregularities in its disposition process. The objective of our audit was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD disposition procedures and used its sales proceeds properly.
The Authority did not follow required disposition procedures and did not use…
September 30, 2013
Report
#2013-DE-1005
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus formula grant. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s1 jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
September 30, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1012
The Flint Housing Commission, Flint, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Flint Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund formula grant based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD), and its own requirements. …
September 27, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1009
The Adams County Housing Authority, Commerce City, CO, Did Not Properly Use Its Disposition Sales Proceeds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Adams County Housing Authority based on concerns that the Authority did not follow HUD regulations in the use of its disposition sales proceeds. The objectives of our audit were to determine whether the Authority placed the required number of Section 8 voucher holders into its Terrace Gardens units and appropriately spent its disposition…
September 26, 2013
Report
#2013-DE-1004
The Flint Housing Commission, Flint, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grants in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD's, and Its Own Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Flint Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund competitive grants. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grants in accordance with…
September 27, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-0013
The Saginaw Housing Commission, Saginaw, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audited the Saginaw Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon our previous audits of its use of Federal funds and a request from HUD management to perform a comprehensive review of its programs. Our objective…
September 27, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-1012
The Aurora Housing Authority Did Not Always Follow Requirements When Obligating, Expending, and Reporting Information About Its Recovery Act Capital Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General reviewed the Aurora Housing Authority to determine whether the Authority obligated its funds by the deadline, adequately managed its procurements and contracts, and accurately reported its Recovery Act information in FederalReporting.gov. We determined that the Authority did not obligate $22,018 of its Recovery Act funds by the March 17, 2010, deadline,…
May 04, 2012
Report
#2012-DE-1004