The Little Rock Housing Authority, Little Rock, AR, Did Not Fully Meet Rental Assistance Demonstration Program Requirements
We audited the Little Rock Housing Authority’s Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD program). We initiated this assignment due to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Little Rock Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH) field office’s concern about the amount of funds that the Authority had spent on RAD program predevelopment costs. HUD designated the Authority as “troubled” mainly due to its…
April 23, 2019
Report
#2019-FW-1001
The Benkelman Housing Authority, Benkelman, NE, Did Not Follow HUD Rules and Regulations for Public Housing Programs Related to Procurement and Maintenance, Tenant Certifications, Laundry Machine Income, and Expenditures
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Benkelman Housing Authority based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General (HUD OIG), Office of Investigation. Additionally, HUD conducted an onsite assessment in May 2016 and identified concerns, including procurement, income verification, travel policy, and significant control…
September 27, 2018
Report
#2018-KC-1004
The Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority, Fairmont, WV, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards and That It Accurately Calculated Housing Assistance Payment Abatements
We audited the Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority did not follow program requirements, (2) the Authority administered 1,117 vouchers and received more than $5.2 million in funding for fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher…
February 15, 2018
Report
#2018-PH-1002
The Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority, Fairmont, WV, Did Not Always Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With Applicable Program Requirements
We audited the Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority did not follow program requirements, (2) the Authority administered 1,117 vouchers and received more than $5.2 million in funding for fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority adequately administered its Housing…
February 11, 2018
Report
#2018-PH-1001
The Fairmont Housing Authority Did Not Fully Comply With Procurement Requirements and Spent Funds for Ineligible Expenses
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the Fairmont Housing Authority in Fairmont, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures.
The Authority did not properly…
September 01, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1008
The York Housing Authority Did Not Fully Comply With Procurement Requirements and Spent $21,047 for Ineligible and Unsupported Costs
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the York Housing Authority in York, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures.
The Authority did not properly procure…
August 20, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1006
The Stromsburg Housing Authority Did Not Fully Comply With Procurement Requirements and Spent Funds for Ineligible Expenses
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the Stromsburg Housing Authority in Stromsburg, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures.
The Authority did not…
August 20, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1007
The Hot Springs Housing Authority, Hot Springs, AR Did Not Comply With Federal Regulations and Other Requirements When Administering Its Public Housing Programs
In accordance with our regional plan to review public housing programs and because of a complaint filed by a contractor with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and issues identified by HUD’s Office of Public Housing, we performed a review of the Hot Springs Housing Authority. The contractor alleged that the Authority did not procure a contract in compliance with Federal…
August 14, 2015
Memorandum
#2015-FW-1807
The Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority, Charleston, WV, Needs To Improve Its Housing Quality Standards Inspections and Apply Correct Payment Standards When Calculating Housing Assistance Payments
We audited the Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) it received more than $13.7 million in program funding in fiscal year 2012, (2) it is the largest assisted housing agency in the State of West Virginia, and (3) we had never audited its Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met U.S.…
July 17, 2013
Report
#2013-PH-1005
Mountain CAP of WV, Inc., Buckhannon, WV, Did Not Administer Its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program in Accordance With Applicable Recovery Act and HUD Requirements
We audited Mountain CAP of WV, Inc.’s administration of its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program funds. We selected Mountain CAP for audit because of a complaint alleging that controls over its disbursements were weak. Our audit objective was to determine whether Mountain CAP maintained proper financial management of and accountability for its program to ensure that it used the funds according to the American Recovery and…
March 15, 2012
Report
#2012-PH-1008
The Housing Authority of the City of Little Rock, AR, Generally Complied With Recovery Act Funding Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Little Rock’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 funding. The Authority received more than $6.5 million in Recovery Act funds through three grants: one formula and two competitive. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) obligated and expended its Recovery Act funding in accordance with HUD rules and regulations and (2) followed Recovery Act reporting requirements…
November 20, 2011
Report
#2012-FW-1003
The West Virginia Housing Development Fund, Charleston, WV, Generally Administered Its Tax Credit Assistance Program Funded Under the Recovery Act in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
We audited the West Virginia Housing Development Fund’s (Fund) Tax Credit Assistance Program (Program) funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) due to a complaint from the Recovery and Transparency Board. We also audited the Fund’s Program because it was the only housing finance agency across the Nation that had not spent any of its Program funds. Our objective was to determine whether the Fund…
March 21, 2011
Report
#2011-PH-1008
The West Memphis, AR, Housing Authority Generally Administered Its Recovery Act Funding in Compliance With Requirements
We audited the West Memphis Housing Authority (Authority) in Arkansas as part of our annual audit plan to review American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (Recovery Act). Our objective was to determine whether obligations the Authority made between January 30 and March 17, 2010, were appropriate, prudent, eligible, and supported, whether procurements and disbursements were made in accordance with requirements.
Generally, the Authority complied…
January 04, 2011
Report
#2011-FW-1004
The Omaha, Nebraska Housing Authority Did Not Comply With Recovery Act Requirements When Reporting on Recovery Act Capital Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Omaha Nebraska Housing Authority (Authority) to determine whether the Authority (1) obligated Recovery Act grant funds in accordance with Recovery Act requirements and applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules, (2) expended Recovery Act grant funds in accordance with Recovery Act requirements and applicable HUD rules…
September 30, 2010
Report
#2010-KC-1009
The State of Arkansas Has the Capacity to Manage Recovery Act Funding
The State of Arkansas (State) is scheduled to receive more than $15.67 million under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). As part of our organization’s commitment to ensure the proper use of Recovery Act funds, we reviewed the State’s controls and operations. Specifically, our objective was to determine whether the State has the capacity to account for Recovery Act funding and the controls to ensure that its…
December 14, 2009
Memorandum
#2010-FW-1801
The Fort Smith Housing Authority Made Inappropriate Guarantees, Did Not Follow Procurement Requirements, and Spent Program Funds on Questionable Activities
We audited the Fort Smith Housing Authority (Authority) in response to a request from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Public Housing. The objectives were to determine whether the Authority and its instrumentality, North Pointe Limited Partnership (Partnership), spent HUD-provided funds in compliance with HUD's rules and regulations for costs related to North Pointe Development (the development),…
October 22, 2008
Report
#2009-FW-1001
The Schuyler Housing Authority, Schuyler, Nebraska, Improperly Used Public Housing Funds to Support a Non-HUD Assisted Living Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Schuyler Housing Authority (Authority) to determine whether the Authority improperly spent public housing assets when developing and operating an assisted living program.
We found that the Authority inappropriately used more than $78,000 in public housing funds to pay expenses of a non-HUD assisted living program. In addition, the Authority…
February 19, 2008
Report
#2008-KC-1002
The Douglas County Housing Authority of Omaha, Nebraska, Improperly Encumbered and Spent Its Public Housing Funds
HUD OIG reviewed the development activities of the Douglas County Housing Authority (Authority), Omaha, Nebraska, to determine whether the Authority encumbered or spent U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) assets for nonfederal development activities without HUD approval.
The Authority inappropriately encumbered nearly $1.67 million in federal assets when it entered into loan documents containing setoff provisions against the…
February 10, 2008
Report
#2008-KC-1001
Oak Mound Associates, Clarksburg, West Virginia, Improperly Billed HUD for Section 8 Subsidies
June 19, 2007
Report
#2007-PH-1007
The Jacksonville Housing Authority, Jacksonville, Arkansas, Mismanaged Public Housing Capital Fund Program Funding
March 30, 2007
Report
#2007-FW-1007