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
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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
The Springfield Housing Authority, Springfield, IL, Needs To Improve Its American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Contract Administration Procedures
We audited the Springfield Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus formula grant. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its grant in accordance with…
February 22, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-1003
The Rockford Housing Authority, Rockford, IL, Needs to Improve Its American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Contract Administration Procedures
We audited the Rockford Housing Authority’s (Authority) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus Formula and Competitive grants. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based on a citizen complaint. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its grants in accordance with Recovery Act and U.S.…
July 25, 2011
Report
#2011-CH-1010
The DuPage Housing Authority, Wheaton, IL, Inappropriately Administered Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the DuPage Housing Authority’s (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2010 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based on the results of our audits of its Project-Based Voucher program. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority effectively…
March 23, 2011
Report
#2011-CH-1006
The East St. Louis, IL Housing Authority Drew Capital Funds for Unsupported and Ineligible Expenses
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the East St. Louis Housing Authority’s (Authority) Public Housing Capital Fund program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority had proper support for its capital fund draws. We concluded that the Authority drew down grant funds for ineligible items and without adequate support. Specifically, it made unsupported draws, excessive…
February 28, 2011
Report
#2011-KC-1002