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 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 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 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 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 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
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
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
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 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 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 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 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 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