The New York City Housing Authority Should Enhance Its Fraud Risk Management Practices
Departments are required by law to develop and maintain governance structures, controls, and processes to safeguard resources and assets. A robust fraud risk framework helps to ensure that programs fulfill their intended purpose and that funds are spent effectively. HUD relies on public housing authorities (PHAs) to detect and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in its housing programs. Therefore, we audited the New York City Housing Authority…
March 07, 2025
Report
#2025-FO-1001
The Philadelphia Housing Authority Needs To Improve Oversight Of Lead-Based Paint In Its Public Housing
We audited the Philadelphia Housing Authority’s (Authority) management of lead‐based paint in its public housing program based on our assessment of the risks of lead‐based paint in public housing agencies’ (PHA) housing developments. The risk factors included the age of buildings, the number of units, household demographics, reported cases of childhood lead poisoning, and reports of missing lead‐based paint inspections in HUD’s data. The…
March 22, 2023
Report
#2023-CH-1001
The Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority, Buffalo, NY, Needs To Improve Its Management of the Commodore Perry Homes Development To Address Longstanding Concerns
We audited the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority’s management of its Commodore Perry Homes development. We selected the Authority based on congressional interest. Half of the development’s buildings were demolished more than 20 years ago, and the majority of the remaining buildings and units have been vacant for years without redevelopment activity. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority properly…
January 11, 2022
Report
#2022-NY-1001
The Philadelphia Housing Authority, Philadelphia, PA, Did Not Comply With Procurement and Conflict-of-Interest Requirements
We audited the Philadelphia, PA, Housing Authority’s use of public housing program operating funds because we received a complaint alleging that the Authority misused U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds. Our objective was to determine whether allegations from the complaint had merit. We focused the audit on whether the Authority properly procured (1) relocation services, (2) job training services, (3) a…
April 20, 2020
Report
#2020-PH-1001
New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, New York, NY, Did Not Always Ensure That Units Met Housing Quality Standards but Generally Abated Payments When Required
We audited the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development’s (HPD) Housing Choice Voucher Program. We selected HPD for review based on its size and because we had not conducted an audit of its Housing Choice Voucher Program. The objective of the audit was to determine whether HPD ensured that its program units met HUD’s housing quality standards and whether it abated housing assistance payments when required.…
August 02, 2019
Report
#2019-NY-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Easton, PA, Did Not Always Properly Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Easton, PA’s Housing Choice Voucher Program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority made improper payments to program participants and a consultant to the Authority inappropriately placed herself on the program waiting list and (2) we had never audited the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with…
July 30, 2019
Report
#2019-PH-1001
The Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority, Buffalo, NY, Did Not Administer Its Operating Funds in Accordance With Requirements
We audited the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority based on our risk analysis of public housing agencies that fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Buffalo, NY, field office. The objective of our audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its operating funds in accordance with applicable HUD, Federal, and Authority requirements.
We found that the Authority did not…
September 26, 2018
Report
#2018-NY-1006
The Adams County Housing Authority, Gettysburg, PA, Did Not Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program According to HUD Requirements
We audited the Adams County Housing Authority because (1) a news article reported that the executive director received an excessive salary and practiced nepotism, (2) we received a complaint alleging nepotism and potential misuse of Federal funds, and (3) we had never audited the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program according to applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
September 19, 2018
Report
#2018-PH-1005
Glen Cove Housing Authority, Glen Cove, NY, Did Not Always Use Property Disposition Proceeds in Accordance With Requirements
We audited the Glen Cove Housing Authority’s administration of the disposition proceeds it received from selling properties. We selected the Authority for review because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) New York Office of Public and Indian Housing ranked it as the third highest risk performer among 67 public housing providers in New York and because the audited financial statements and property disposition…
January 18, 2018
Report
#2018-NY-1002
The New Brunswick Housing Authority, NJ, Did Not Always Administer Its Operating and Capital Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the New Brunswick Housing Authority because it was classified as a troubled public housing agency and based on our risk analysis of public housing agencies located in the State of New Jersey. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its operating and capital funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements.
We found that the Authority did not…
September 28, 2017
Report
#2017-NY-1013
The Chester Housing Authority, Chester, PA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Chester Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) it recently regained control of its operations after 20 years in receivership, (2) it had 1,566 vouchers and received more than $14.9 million in fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met the U.S. Department of Housing and…
September 28, 2017
Report
#2017-PH-1007
The New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority, New Rochelle, NY, Did Not Always Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With HUD’s Rules and Regulations
We completed a review of the New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority’s administration of its public housing program. We selected the Authority based on a management request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) New York Office of Public Housing. The Authority was designated as a troubled housing authority and had indicators of noncompliance with program requirements, such as using program funds to pay…
January 30, 2017
Report
#2017-NY-1006
The Town of Amherst, NY, Did Not Ensure That Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards (REISSUED February 17, 2017)
(REISSUED February 17, 2017)
We audited the Town of Amherst’s Housing Choice Voucher program administered through a contractor, Belmont Housing Resources for Western New York, to address our audit plan priority to ensure that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) public and Indian housing programs are sufficiently administered by public housing agencies (PHA). We selected this auditee based on a risk analysis of…
December 13, 2016
Report
#2017-NY-1003
The Tarrytown Municipal Housing Authority, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Procurement, Administrative, and Program Requirements
We audited the Tarrytown Municipal Housing Authority’s administration of its public housing program based on an Office of Inspector General risk assessment. The objectives of the audit were to evaluate the Authority’s financial controls to determine whether (1) U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds were used for eligible, reasonable, and supported expenses and (2) adequate financial controls were maintained to…
November 21, 2016
Report
#2017-NY-1002
Officials of the Rochester Housing Authority, Rochester, NY, Generally Administered the Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance with HUD Regulations
We audited the Rochester Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program to address our goal to contribute to improving the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) execution of its fiscal responsibilities. We selected this auditee based on a risk analysis of public housing agencies administered by the HUD Buffalo field office, which considered, among other factors, funds received and the number of program housing units…
August 05, 2016
Report
#2016-NY-1008
The Westmoreland County Housing Authority, Greensburg, PA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards and That It Accurately Calculated Housing Assistance Payment Abatements
We audited the Westmoreland County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) authorized it more than $8.7 million in program funding per year in fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and we had not audited its program. This is the second of two audit reports on the Authority’s program. Our objectives in this audit were to determine whether the Authority ensured that…
April 27, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1002
The Westmoreland County Housing Authority, Greensburg, PA, Did Not Properly Manage Its Housing Choice Voucher Waiting List and Select Applicants as Required
We audited the Westmoreland County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program. We selected the Authority for audit because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) authorized it more than $8.7 million in program funding per year for fiscal years 2013 and 2014 and we had not audited its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority managed its waiting list and selected families in…
January 12, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1001
The Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh, PA, Did Not Always Make Payments for Outside Legal Services in Compliance With Applicable Requirements
We conducted a review of the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh’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…
September 30, 2015
Memorandum
#2015-PH-1808
The Bucks County Housing Authority, Doylestown, PA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Bucks County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) authorized it more than $15 million per year in fiscal years 2012 to 2014 and we had not audited its housing quality standards inspection program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met HUD’s housing quality standards…
May 05, 2015
Report
#2015-PH-1002
The Freeport Housing Authority, Freeport, NY, Did Not Administer Its Low-Rent Housing and Homeownership Programs in Accordance With HUD’s Regulations
We completed a review of the Freeport Housing Authority’s administration of its low-rent housing and homeownership programs. We selected the Authority due to a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) New York Office of Public and Indian Housing officials. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its low-rent housing and homeownership programs in accordance with…
November 30, 2014
Report
#2015-NY-1002