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 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 City of Chattanooga, TN, Did Not Always Administer Its ESG Program in Accordance With HUD’s Requirements
We audited the City of Chattanooga’s Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program. We selected the City for review in accordance with our annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to determine whether the City administered its ESG program in accordance with HUD’s requirements.
The City did not always administer its ESG program in accordance with HUD’s requirements. Specifically, it did not ensure that program expenditures were…
September 28, 2017
Report
#2017-AT-1013
Shelby County, TN, Administered Its Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program Funds for Infrastructure in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited Shelby County’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) grant. We selected the County for review in accordance with our annual audit plan and because the County received more than $7.4 million in funding to recover from severe storms, tornadoes, straight-line winds, and flooding that occurred in April 2011. Our audit objective was to determine whether the County ensured that (1) funds were spent only…
January 17, 2017
Report
#2017-AT-1002
Franklin American Mortgage Company Settled Allegations of Failing To Comply With HUD’s Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), assisted the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Colorado, in the civil investigation of Franklin American Mortgage Company. Franklin American has its principal place of business in Franklin, TN. Franklin American became an FHA-approved direct endorsement lender in 1995. As a direct…
September 08, 2016
Memorandum
#2016-CF-1801
Taliafaro, Inc., a Multifamily Housing Management Agent, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’ Requirements or Its Own Policies and Procedures in the Disbursement of Project Funds and Collection of Its Fees
We reviewed the disbursement of project funds for seven of the Sections 202 and 811 supportive housing projects for the elderly and persons with disabilities managed by Taliafaro, Inc. We initiated the audit under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether Taliafaro used project funds appropriately and operated multifamily…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-1012
First Tennessee, N.A. Settled Allegations of Failing To Comply With HUD’s Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG) assisted the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Georgia, in conducting a review of First Tennessee has its principal place of business in Memphis, TN and is a wholly owned subsidiary of First Horizon Financial Corporation. First Tennessee became an FHA-approved direct endorsement…
September 29, 2015
Memorandum
#2015-AT-1801
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
Peoples Home Equity, Inc., Brentwood, TN, Did Not Follow HUD Requirements in Approving FHA Loans and Implementing Its Quality Control Program
We audited Peoples Home Equity, Inc.(Peoples), a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) approved nonsupervised direct endorsement lender located in Brentwood, TN. We selected Peoples based on its high default rates. The audit was part of our annual audit plan to review single family programs and lenders. Our audit objectives were to determine whether Peoples complied with HUD requirements when it originated and underwrote FHA…
September 30, 2014
Report
#2014-AT-1013
The Memphis Housing Authority, Memphis, TN, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Units Met HUD’s Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Memphis, TN, Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 audit plan. We selected the Authority because it had a large program, receiving about $40 million in yearly funding, and was part of the OIG’s annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority’s inspection process adequately ensured that its units were in material compliance with…
September 30, 2014
Report
#2014-AT-1014
The City of Memphis, TN, Did Not Have Effective Controls To Administer Its Housing and Rehabilitation Program Activities
We audited the City of Memphis’ Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships Program-funded Housing and Rehabilitation Program (HARP) as part of the activities in our 2013 fiscal year annual audit plan and based on a referral from the Office of Inspector General’s Office of Investigation. Our audit objective was to determine whether the City used its CDBG and HOME funds for eligible activities and complied…
December 29, 2013
Report
#2014-AT-1003
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 Shelby County, TN, Housing Authority Mismanaged Its HUD-Funded Programs
We audited the Shelby County Housing Authority in Memphis, TN, based upon an audit request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General for Investigation. The request included many areas of concern for both public housing operations and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program administration. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with HUD requirements for administering its…
January 25, 2012
Report
#2012-AT-1007
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 City of Memphis, TN, Did Not Ensure Compliance With All Requirements for Its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing and Community Development Block Grant-Recovery Programs
HUD OIG audited the City of Memphis’ administration of its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) and Community Development Block Grant-Recovery (CDBG-R) funds received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. We selected the City for audit because it received more than $3.3 million in HPRP funds and more than $2.1 million in CDBG-R funds, the most for any Tennessee city. The City had expended more than $1.5…
August 26, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1015
The Nashville, TN, Metropolitan Development and Housing Agency Generally Complied With Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 Requirements
We reviewed the Metropolitan Development and Housing Agency’s (Agency) Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 (NSP2). We selected the Agency for review because it received, in a consortium established with The Housing Fund, Urban Housing Solutions, and Woodbine Community Organization, a nearly $30.5 million NSP2 grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The Agency was the only NSP2 grant recipient in Tennessee. Our…
April 06, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1005
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