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 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 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 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 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 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 Hopewell Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Hopewell, VA, Generally Used Housing Choice Voucher and Public Housing Program Funds in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
We audited the Hopewell Redevelopment and Housing Authority’s use of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Housing Choice Voucher and public housing program funds. We audited the Authority because we received a complaint alleging that the Authority (1) improperly calculated tenant rents and utility allowances, (2) improperly managed the program waiting list, (3) used credit cards for personal transactions, (4) made…
February 03, 2014
Report
#2014-PH-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 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
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 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 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
The Richmond Redevelopment & Housing Authority, Richmond, Virginia, Did Not Adequately Administer Its Housing Assistance Payments for Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority (Authority) administration of its housing assistance payments for leased housing. This is the last of three audit reports we plan to issue on the Authority's program. The audit objective addressed in this report was to determine whether the Authority properly maintained documentation to support housing assistance payments and accurately calculated them.
The Authority did not…
July 10, 2009
Report
#2009-PH-1009
The Housing Authority of the City of Brush, Colorado, Did Not Perform Contracting Activities in Accordance with Federal Procurement Requirements
The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Authority of the City of Brush, Colorado (Authority) because we received information indicating there were irregularities in the Authority's procurement process. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority performed contracting activities in accordance with federal procurement requirements.
The Authority did not…
February 24, 2009
Report
#2009-DE-1002
The Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Richmond, Virginia, Did Not Ensure That Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority's (Authority) administration of its housing quality standards inspection program for its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program as part of our fiscal year 2008 audit plan. Our audit was to determine whether the Authority adequately administered its Section 8 housing quality standards inspection program to ensure that its program units met housing quality standards in accordance…
November 13, 2008
Report
#2009-PH-1001
The Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Richmond, Virginia, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
Attached is the final report on our audit of the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority (Authority), Richmond, Virginia, Audit Report Number 2008-PH-1006, dated April 15, 2008. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority adequately managed its waiting list, met HUD's lease-up thresholds, and operated its Family Self-Sufficiency program according to HUD requirements. The Authority's Housing Choice Voucher program…
April 15, 2008
Report
#2008-PH-1006
The Housing Authority of the City of Brighton, Colorado, Did Not Maintain Proper Inventory Records and Improperly Awarded Contracts
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Brighton, Colorado (Authority) in response to a complaint alleging that it did not have an inventory control system and that it used poor procurement practices.
Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority had an adequate inventory control system and whether it performed contracting activities in accordance with federal procurement requirements.
The Authority did not have complete…
March 18, 2008
Report
#2008-DE-1002
The Housing Authority of the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado, Improperly Managed Contracts and Improperly Maintained Its Section 8 Waiting List
HUD-OIG audited the Housing Authority of the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado in response to an anonymous complaint alleging that it improperly awarded all contracts for rehabilitation services to the same bidder, did not properly maintain its waiting list, and inappropriately awarded new Section 8 housing choice vouchers.
Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority followed federal procurement requirements and its own…
November 26, 2007
Report
#2008-DE-1001
The Newport News Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Newport News, Virginia, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
July 24, 2007
Report
#2007-PH-1009