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 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
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 Tacoma, WA, Housing Authority Generally Satisfied RAD Requirements but Did Not Follow Its Moving to Work Policy by Conducting Annual Tenant Reexaminations for Its RAD Converted Units
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Tacoma Housing Authority’s participation in the Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) because it had the highest number of completed RAD units and the second highest number of total RAD units in HUD’s Region 10. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority executed the appropriate written agreements for RAD, ensured that…
December 21, 2018
Report
#2019-SE-1001
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
The Spokane, WA, Housing Authority Did Not Follow Permanent Relocation Requirements for Its RAD Conversion of the Parsons Apartments
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Spokane Housing Authority due to the Authority’s participation in the Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD), which was a priority for the Office of Audit. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority followed relocation requirements during its RAD conversion of the Parsons Apartments.
We found that The Authority did not…
April 24, 2018
Report
#2018-SE-1001
The Housing Authority of Snohomish County, Everett, WA, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Project-Based Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General selected the Housing Authority of Snohomish County for audit based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Labor Standards Enforcement in Seattle, WA. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority executed Agreements To Enter Into Housing Assistance Payments Contract (forms HUD-52531-A and…
September 29, 2017
Report
#2017-SE-1002
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 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
Review of the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh, PA's Compliance With Federal Lobbying Disclosure Requirements and Restrictions
We conducted a review of the Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh’s compliance with Federal lobbying disclosure requirements and restrictions based on concerns noted during our ongoing internal audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) oversight of public housing authorities’ compliance with Federal lobbying disclosure requirements. Our review objective was to determine whether the Authority complied…
May 02, 2014
Memorandum
#2014-PH-1803
The Yakama Nation Housing Authority Did Not Always Properly Spend Its Recovery Act funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited how the Yakama Nation Housing Authority used its nearly $4.9 million Native American Housing Block Grant provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority properly spent its Recovery Act funds, correctly obtained small purchases, and properly reported Recovery Act…
April 29, 2014
Report
#2014-SE-1002
The Housing Authority of the County of Lackawanna, Dunmore, PA, Needs To Improve Its Controls Over Its Operations To Comply With HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the County of Lackawanna, PA, because we received an anonymous complaint alleging incompetent leadership, nepotism, misuse of funds, and poor quality of life at the Authority. Our objectives were to determine whether the allegations in the complaint had merit and whether the Authority had effective controls to prevent conflicts of interest, ensure that interfund accounts were settled in a timely manner…
February 27, 2014
Report
#2014-PH-1003
The Blair County Housing Authority Generally Followed HUD's Housing Choice Voucher Program Regulations
We audited the Blair County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program due to a citizen’s complaint alleging that the Authority (1) did not properly calculate housing assistance payments, (2) did not allow tenants to receive disability allowances, and (3) used outdated utility allowance schedules. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority accurately calculated housing assistance payments, disability allowances and…
June 27, 2013
Report
#2013-PH-1004
Review of the Circumstances Concerning the Abrupt Departure of the Executive Director of the Philadelphia Housing Authority, Philadelphia, PA, and the Potential Improper Use of HUD Funds
We conducted a limited scope review of the Philadelphia Housing Authority based on questions surrounding the abrupt departure of the Authority’s executive director in June 2012. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority’s executive director improperly used U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds by providing improper gifts or unsupported promotions to a senior staff member with whom he had an improper…
January 09, 2013
Memorandum
#2013-PH-1801
The Allegheny County Housing Authority, Pittsburgh, PA, Needs To Improve Its Inspections To Ensure That All Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Units Meet Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Allegheny County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) the Authority received more than $27.3 million in Housing Choice Voucher funding in fiscal year 2011, (2) an article in the October 22, 2011, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette described housing quality standards problems with a housing unit participating in the Authority’s program, and (3) we had never audited the Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program. The…
September 21, 2012
Report
#2012-PH-1012
Vancouver, WA, Housing Authority Did Not Always Manage or Report on Recovery Act Funds in Accordance With Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Vancouver Housing Authority to determine whether it was managing and reporting its three awarded Recovery Act Capital Fund grants in accordance with requirements. We selected the Authority because it was part of our annual audit plan, which includes reviewing funds provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
The Authority did not…
December 20, 2011
Report
#2012-SE-1002
The Bellingham Whatcom County Housing Authorities, Bellingham, WA, Generally Complied With American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Capital Fund Grant Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Bellingham Whatcom County Housing Authorities to determine whether expenditures for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Capital Fund Grants were appropriate, eligible, and adequately supported and whether related procurements were made in accordance with 24 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 85 and Recovery Act requirements. We selected…
October 14, 2011
Report
#2012-SE-1001