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 Greensboro Housing Authority, Greensboro, NC, Generally Administered Its Rental Assistance Demonstration Conversion in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Greensboro Housing Authority’s Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) conversion. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its RAD conversion in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. Specifically, we wanted to determine whether the Authority (1) executed appropriate written agreements, (2) ensured that project financing sources were secured…
May 10, 2018
Report
#2018-AT-1004
The Lexington Housing Authority, Lexington, NC, Did Not Administer Its RAD Conversion in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Lexington Housing Authority’s Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) conversion. We selected the Authority based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing and a request from the Housing Authority’s Board of Commissioners. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its RAD program in accordance with HUD…
August 21, 2017
Report
#2017-AT-1011
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 Sanford Housing Authority, Sanford, NC, Did Not Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Sanford Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Programs as a result of problems identified during a technical assistance review performed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing. Additionally, our audit is in keeping with our annual audit plan to ensure that public housing agencies sufficiently administer HUD’s programs in accordance with…
September 13, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1013
The Sanford Housing Authority, Sanford, NC, Did Not Comply With Procurement and Financial Requirements
We audited the Sanford Housing Authority’s procurement and financial operations. We selected the Authority based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing, following a technical assistance review performed. The technical assistance review identified issues with the Authority’s procurement practices and financial operations, among other items. The…
July 19, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1008
The Housing Authority of the City of Durham, NC, Did Not Adequately Enforce HUD’s and Its Own Housing Quality Control Standards
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Durham’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program’s housing quality standards based on our recent audit of the Authority’s program, during which potential issues with the Authority’s inspections were noted, and as part of our annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that program units met the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD…
May 10, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1005
The Housing Authority of the City of Durham, NC, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Durham’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on a hotline citizen complaint and as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. 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 and whether the complaint was valid.
The Authority…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-1011
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Greensboro Office
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…
July 14, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0004
The Housing Authority of the City of Lumberton, NC, Did Not Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With Requirements
We initiated a review of the Housing Authority of the City of Lumberton, NC, at the request of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Greensboro, NC, Office of Public Housing. HUD staff described many areas of concern, including cash management, procurement, and inventory controls. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD and other Federal…
December 04, 2013
Report
#2014-AT-1002
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 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 Housing Authority of the City of Hickory, NC, Mismanaged Some of Its HUD Funds
We audited the public housing program of the Housing Authority of the City of Hickory, NC, due to a citizen’s hotline complaint. Our objectives were to evaluate the merits of the complaint allegations and determine whether the Authority complied with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements for procurement, cash disbursements, a 2004 Resident Opportunity and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) grant, and inventory control.
The…
June 01, 2012
Report
#2012-AT-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
The Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina Did Not Follow Some Requirements for Its Native American Housing Block Grants Received Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
We selected the tribe for audit because it received a $4.7 million formula grant and a $4 million competitive grant, the largest Native American Housing Block Grants awarded in North Carolina under the Recovery Act. Our objective was to determine whether the tribe administered its Native American Housing Block Grants in compliance with Recovery Act and other applicable requirements, specifically, whether it had (1) expended funds on a timely…
December 05, 2011
Report
#2012-AT-1003
Trinidad Housing Authority Did Not Always Follow Requirements When Expending and Reporting Information About Its Recovery Act Capital Funds
November 28, 2011
Report
#2012-DE-1002
The Greensboro Housing Authority Needs To Improve Internal Controls for Administering Recovery Act Funds
We audited the Greensboro Housing Authority (Authority) as part of our annual plan to review public housing capital funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). The Authority received a $5.6 million Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act Funded grant, the second highest in the State. It also received a Recovery Act funded $1.05 million capital fund competitive grant for addressing…
July 21, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1013
The Housing Authority of the City and County of Denver, CO, Generally Followed Requirements When Obligating and Expending its Recovery Act Capital Funds But Did Not Accurately Report Recovery Act Grant Information
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, reviewed the Housing Authority of the City and County of Denver, CO (Authority), because it had the largest number of low-rent and Section 8 units and received the largest amount of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) capital funds of all of the housing authorities in HUD's Region VIII (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Montana, North…
June 16, 2011
Report
#2011-DE-1003
The Housing Authority, City of Wilson, NC, Mismanaged Its Section 8 Program
HUD OIG audited the Housing Authority of the City of Wilson’s (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. We elected to perform the audit after finding indicators of Section 8 deficiencies during our review of the Authority’s capacity to administer capital funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Audit Report 2010-AT-1007). Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority complied with U.S.…
January 13, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Pueblo, CO, Generally Followed Recovery Act Rules and Regulations When Obligating and Expending its Recovery Act Capital Funds, But Did Not Accurately Report Recovery Act Funded Jobs
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, reviewed the Housing Authority of the City of Pueblo, CO (Authority), based on out risk assessment considering the amount of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) capital funds it received and expended along with other evaluative factors. The review is consistent with our responsibility to provide oversight of Recovery Act…
September 17, 2010
Report
#2010-DE-1005