Alexander County Housing Authority 's improper usage of HUD subsidized Asset Management Project funds
The OIG investigation focused on the Cairo, IL, based Alexander County Housing Authority's (ACHA) improper usage of HUD subsidized Asset Management Project (AMP) funds with prosecutorial consideration being given to 18 USC 666 (Theft, Intentional Misapplication of Funds), 18 USC 1001, (False Statements) and 18 USC 371 (Conspiracy). These funds (also referred to as operating funds and low rent housing project funds) and Capital funds are governed…
June 05, 2019
Investigation summary
The Housing Authority of the City of North Chicago, North Chicago, IL, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of North Chicago’s 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 2018 annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority appropriately managed its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own…
December 20, 2018
Report
#2019-CH-1001
The Housing Authority of the County of Lake, Grayslake, IL, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the County of Lake, IL’s Housing Choice Voucher Program based on the activities included in our 2018 annual audit plan and our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority appropriately managed its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own…
September 25, 2018
Report
#2018-CH-1007
The Housing Authority of the City of New Haven, CT, Made Ineligible Housing Assistance Payments From Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of New Haven’s Housing Choice Voucher program based on our risk assessment of the program for the New England region, the size of the Authority’s program, the time lapse since our last audit, and the inherent risk of the program. Our audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials only made eligible housing assistance payments.
Authority officials made $314,611 in ineligible…
November 15, 2017
Report
#2018-BO-1002
The Menard County Housing Authority, Petersburg, IL, Did Not Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Menard County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program based on the activities included in our 2017 annual audit plan and our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own requirements regarding the administration of its…
September 28, 2017
Report
#2017-CH-1007
Majestic Management, LLC, St. Louis, MO, a Management Agent for the East St. Louis Housing Authority, Mismanaged Its Public Housing Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited Majestic Management, LLC’s management agent activities for the public housing program at the East St. Louis Housing Authority. Our objective was to determine whether Majestic Management made only eligible and supported payments for payroll, complied with procurement requirements, and properly performed initial tenant certifications and annual…
September 26, 2017
Report
#2017-KC-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Hartford, CT, Did Not Always Comply With Procurement Requirements
We audited the public housing and Housing Choice Voucher programs at the Housing Authority of the City of Hartford, CT, as a result of a hotline complaint alleging potential noncompliance with procurement requirements. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority complied with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Federal procurement requirements and the Authority’s procurement policy.
The…
September 21, 2017
Report
#2017-BO-1007
The Alphabet Group, LLC, Marks Group, LLC, and Imagineers, Inc., Settled Allegations Related to Section 8 Rent Certifications
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), assisted the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut in the civil investigation of The Alphabet Group, LLC, Marks Group, LLC, and Imagineers, Inc. Alphabet and Marks are owners of residential housing in Hartford, CT, and Imagineers administers the Section 8 program for the City of Hartford Housing Authority.
On May 17, 2012, an…
September 19, 2016
Memorandum
#2016-CF-1807
The Administration of Accounting, Inventory, and Procurement of the Bridgeport Housing Authority in Bridgeport, CT, Did Not Always Comply With HUD Regulations
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, in response to complaints about improper use of funds, procurement irregularities, and inadequate safeguarding of equipment. The audit objective was to determine whether Federal funds were used for eligible and adequately supported costs, procurements were executed in compliance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations, and the Authority had…
June 27, 2016
Report
#2016-BO-1002
The Alton Housing Authority, Alton, IL, Improperly Phased In Flat Rents for Its Public Housing Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited the Alton Housing Authority because it appeared to have flat rents set at a rate below 80 percent of the fair market rent in that area based on the information available in the Public and Indian Housing Information Center system. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with HUD’s flat rent requirements.
The Authority did…
May 19, 2016
Report
#2016-KC-1004
Allocation of Costs to the Waterbury Housing Authority Asset Management Projects Was Generally Supported
We audited the Waterbury Housing Authority’s administration of its asset management projects based on a risk assessment that considered the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) risk assessment and the Authority’s funding and number of asset management units. Our overall audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials ensured that expenses charged to the Authority’s asset management projects complied with…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-BO-1004
The Chicago Housing Authority, Chicago, IL, Did Not Always Make Payments for Outside Legal Services in Compliance With Requirements
We conducted a review of the Chicago Housing Authority’s payments for outside legal services in conjunction with an ongoing internal audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) oversight of public housing agencies’ expenditures for outside legal services. Our review objective was to determine whether the Authority made payments for outside legal services in compliance with applicable requirements.
We found that…
April 20, 2015
Memorandum
#2015-PH-1805
The Chicago Housing Authority, Chicago, IL, Did Not Always Ensure It Complied With HUD's Requirements For Exception Payment Standards
We audited the Chicago Housing Authority’s Moving to Work Housing Choice Voucher program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based on a request from Congressman Aaron Schock and recent media attention regarding the Authority’s exception payment standards. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with its Moving to Work agreement, the U.S. Department of…
February 23, 2015
Report
#2015-CH-1001
The Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, CT Took Appropriate Action to Resolve a Complaint While Complying With Procurement Regulations
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, doing business as Charter Oak Communities. We received an anonymous complaint against the Authority related to an alleged improper procurement. The complainant alleged that Authority officials awarded a contract to an employee’s spouse without following procurement and conflict-of-interest requirements. In addition, a previous audit (Audit report number 2012-BO-1002…
September 26, 2014
Memorandum
#2014-BO-1801
Authority Officials Did Not Always Follow HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, to address complaints and areas that came to our attention during a prior audit. Our objective was determine whether costs charged to Federal housing programs were eligible, reasonable, and supported. Specifically, we determined whether officials properly (1) charged development staff costs, (2) charged Section 8 consulting costs, (3) implemented flat rents, (4) loaned…
July 31, 2014
Report
#2014-BO-1003
The Moline Housing Authority, Moline, IL, Did Not Always Follow HUD's Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Program
We audited the Moline Housing Authority’s Section 8 program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based on a citizen’s complaint to our office. 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.
The Authority did not always comply with HUD’s…
July 14, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1004
The Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, Did Not Always Ensure That Expenses Charged to Its Federal Programs Were Eligible, Reasonable, and Supported
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Hartford, CT, field office. HUD officials were concerned about the Authority due to significant financial deficiencies that were not corrected in a timely manner. Our audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials ensured that expenses charged to Federal programs were…
January 23, 2014
Report
#2014-BO-1001
The Aurora Housing Authority, Aurora, IL, Did Not Administer Its Grant in
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Aurora Housing Authority’s Recovery Act formula grant. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors related to the housing agencies in Region V’s (see footnote) jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its grant…
September 05, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-1010
The Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, CT, Did Not Properly Administer and Oversee the Operations of Its Federal Programs
We audited the Housing Authority ofthe City of Stamford, CT's administration of its Federal housing programs based on an anonymous complaint. Federal programs included Operating Fund, Section 8 programs (including the Housing Choice Voucher program, Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program, and Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy
program), and Capital Fund programs. The Authority was also awarded an American Recovery…
March 14, 2012
Report
#2012-BO-1002
The East St. Louis Housing Authority Did Not Properly Manage or Report on Recovery Act Capital Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the East St. Louis Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority (1) complied with applicable procurement requirements and properly managed its Recovery Act contracts, (2) properly drew down and expended funds for eligible activities, and (3…
March 01, 2012
Report
#2012-KC-1002