Prospect Mortgage, LLC, Sherman Oaks, CA, Did Not Always Comply With Federal Housing Administration Underwriting and Quality Control Requirements
We audited Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured loans underwritten by Prospect Mortgage, LLC (Prospect), within Region IV of the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Inspector General (OIG). Our objective was to determine whether Prospect complied with HUD’s requirements for (1) origination and underwriting relative to cash assets, income, and creditworthiness; (2) quality controls; and (3) branch office…
July 08, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1011
Multifamily Insured Project Saint Timothy's Tower, Compton, CA, Was Not Administered in Accordance With HUD Rules and Regulations
We reviewed the books and records of Saint Timothy’s Tower (project), a 114-unit U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-insured (Section 236) Section 8 multifamily project consisting of 1 high-rise elevator building located in Compton, CA. We initiated the review in response to a request from the Departmental Enforcement Center due to its concerns about the owner’s use of project funds. Our objective was to determine whether…
June 20, 2011
Report
#2011-LA-1011
People Assisting the Homeless, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Ensure That Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Funds Were Used To Assist Eligible and Supported Participants
We audited the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) of People Assisting the Homeless (PATH) and three of its subgrantees based on the results of a separate audit of the City of Los Angeles Housing Department (Department). HPRP is part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), and auditing the Recovery Act program is part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of…
May 17, 2011
Report
#2011-LA-1010
The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Charged Its Recovery Act Program Without Applying Cost Reductions or Credits Related to Insurance Reimbursements
We reviewed the hazard-damaged units that the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles (Authority) is rehabilitating using formula grant American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) Public Housing Capital Fund program (program) funds. We selected the Authority based upon the results of our capacity review of the Authority’s Recovery Act program (see Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit report #2011-LA-1002, issued…
May 05, 2011
Memorandum
#2011-LA-1802
Special Services for Groups, Los Angeles, CA, Approved Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program Assistance for Unsupported and Ineligible Participants
We audited the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) of Special Services for Groups (Special Services) based on the results of a separate audit of the City of Los Angeles Housing Department (Department). Special Services is a subrecipient of the Department’s HPRP. HPRP is part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), and auditing Recovery Act programs is one of the U.S. Department of Housing…
April 06, 2011
Report
#2011-LA-1009
The Hawthorne Housing Authority Failed To Maintain an Adequate Financial Management System
We completed a review of the Hawthorne Housing Authority’s (Authority) Section 8 program. We performed the audit based on a recommendation from the Los Angeles U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Public Housing indicating missing and/or inadequate financial records, and because Section 8 reviews are a part of the Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the…
March 28, 2011
Report
#2011-LA-1008
Allegations of Lutheran Social Services of Northern California's Misuse of Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program Funds Were Unsubstantiated
We audited Lutheran Social Services of Northern California (auditee) in response to a hotline complaint. The complaint alleged that the auditee misused Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) funds. The specific allegations included (1) ineligible purchases using employee credit cards, (2) unreasonable rental of storage units, (3) caseworkers qualifying family and friends for HPRP who were not eligible, (4) diversion of…
February 07, 2011
Report
#2011-LA-1007
The City and County of San Francisco, CA, Did Not Always Ensure That Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Funds Were Used as Required
We audited the City and County of San Francisco (City) because its grant of more than $8.7 million was one of the largest Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) grants in the State of California. Our objective was to determine whether the City disbursed HPRP funding in accordance with program requirements. The City paid for HPRP services for ineligible participants and participants whose eligibility was not supported. It…
December 20, 2010
Report
#2011-LA-1005
Naomi Gardens, Arcadia, CA, Did Not Comply With HUD Procurement and Waiting List Requirements
We audited the Naomi Gardens housing project (project) in response to a congressional request from Representative David Dreier of the 26th District of California. The request to review the project was based on a constituent’s complaint that alleged the possible misuse of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds, including the award of work to the family members of project employees without seeking proposals from other…
November 23, 2010
Report
#2011-LA-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Generally Had Capacity; However, It Needs To Improve Controls Over Its Administration of Its Capital Fund Grant Awarded Under The Recovery Act Program
We completed a capacity review of the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles’ (Authority) capital fund grant awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) program. We performed the audit because Recovery Act reviews are part of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) annual plan and the Authority was awarded a significant amount of program funds. Our objective was to evaluate the Authority’s capacity in…
November 04, 2010
Report
#2011-LA-1002
The City of Los Angeles Housing Department, Los Angeles, CA, Did Not Always Effectively Administer Its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program
We audited the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (program) at the City of Los Angeles Housing Department (Department) because it was the second largest single program grant awarded within California under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). In addition, our audit is part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) national mandate to monitor…
October 25, 2010
Report
#2011-LA-1001
The Compton Housing Authority, Compton, CA, Was Not Fully Reimbursed for Housing Assistance Payments for Portability Tenants
We audited the Compton Housing Authority’s (Authority) Section 8 program as the result of the Los Angeles Office of Public Housing’s concerns regarding its program administration. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority used Section 8 program funds in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. The Authority did not use Section 8 program funds in accordance with HUD rules and regulations as it did not fully comply with portability…
September 28, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1016
Financial Freedom Senior Funding Corporation, Irvine, CA, Improperly Funded One Ineligible HECM Loan
While performing an internal audit of the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) program, we noted one HECM loan underwritten by Financial Freedom Senior Funding Corporation, (Financial Freedom) of Irvine, CA, that was improperly insured as the property had several years of deferred property taxes, which is a violation of the HECM regulations. Neither Financial Freedom’s loan…
September 17, 2010
Memorandum
#2010-FW-1805
The Housing Authority of the City and County of San Francisco, CA, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Housing Choice Voucher Housing Quality Standards Inspections
We audited the Housing Authority of the City and County of San Francisco’s (Authority) Section 8 housing quality standards inspections of Housing Choice Voucher program (voucher)-funded housing units. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority conducted its housing quality standards inspections in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. We found that the Authority did not conduct its housing quality standards inspections of…
August 31, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1015
The City of Montebello, CA, Did Not Comply With HOME Requirements
We reviewed the City of Montebello’s (City) HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) at the request of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Los Angeles Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD). The request was based on findings contained in a 2008 single audit report and 2009 HUD CPD technical assistance report, which stated that the City did not fully comply with HOME program requirements in the ongoing…
July 08, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1013
Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency Did Not Always Administer the Neighborhood Stabilization Program in Accordance With HUD Rules and Regulations
We audited the Sacramento Housing Redevelopment Agency (Agency) as a result of a hotline complaint, which alleged violations of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (program) funds provided through the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. Our objective was to determine whether the alleged violations had merit. The complaint alleged several instances where the Agency did not follow program rules and regulations, including but not limited to…
June 02, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1011
The City of Los Angeles Housing Department Generally Had Sufficient Capacity and Adequate Internal Controls To Administer its Neighborhod Stabilization Program Funds
We completed a capacity review of the City of Los Angeles’ Housing Department’s (City) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the review because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) reviews are part of our annual audit plan and the program was identified as high risk. We previously audited several different aspects of the City’s HOME Investment Partnerships program, all of which disclosed significant monitoring…
March 17, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1008
The County of San Bernardino, CA, Had Questionable Capacity to Administer Neighborhood Stabilization Program Funds
We completed a capacity review of the County of San Bernardino’s (County) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the audit because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 reviews are part of the Office of the Inspector General’s annual audit plan and the Program was identified as high risk. In addition, the County was awarded significant Program funds of $22.7 million. Our objective was to determine whether the County…
February 10, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1007
City of Fresno Generally Had Sufficient Capacity and the Necessary Controls to Manage and Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program
We completed a capacity review of the City of Fresno’s (City) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the audit because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 reviews are part of the Office of the Inspector General’s annual audit plan and the program was identified as high risk. In addition, the City was awarded a $10.9 grant. Our objective was to determine whether the City had sufficient capacity and the necessary…
February 02, 2010
Report
#2010-LA-1006
Although the County of Riverside Had Sufficient Overall Capacity, It Lacked Necessary Controls To Administer its Neighborhood Stabilization Program
We completed a capacity review of the County of Riverside’s (County) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). We performed the audit because Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 reviews are part of the Office of the Inspector General’s annual audit plan and the program was identified as high risk. In addition, the County was awarded significant Program funds of $48.6 million. Our objective was to determine whether the County had…
December 28, 2009
Report
#2010-LA-1004