The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Adams County Housing Authority based on concerns that the Authority did not follow HUD regulations in the use of its disposition sales proceeds.  The objectives of our audit were to determine whether the Authority placed the required number of Section 8 voucher holders into its Terrace Gardens units and appropriately spent its disposition…

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Retreat at Church Ranch to determine whether the owner submitted a management agent certification to HUD for proper approval and to determine whether the books of account were complete and accurate.  We conducted this audit mainly because of a referral from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Departmental Enforcement…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General reviewed the allegations contained in a hotline complaint against CARE Housing, Inc., Fort Collins, CO, to determine whether CARE accurately represented itself as an eligible community housing development organization (CHDO) and whether it used its grant funds for the Provincetowne project in accordance with applicable rules and regulations.  We found no…

We conducted a review of Brownsville Apartments based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Departmental Enforcement Center and the Pittsburgh Office of Multifamily Housing due to concerns that project funds were used inappropriately for purposes other than the operation of the project.  This concern was due largely to the owner’s lengthy history of being uncooperative with HUD.  Our objective…

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calculate housing assistance payments, (2) did not allow tenants to receive disability allowances, and (3) used outdated utility allowance schedules.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…

We conducted a review of the Philadelphia Housing Authority’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 and during the resolution of recommendations from our prior audit report concerning the…

We conducted a limited review of Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans underwritten by Pulte Mortgage LLC. We selected the lender based on the results of an auditability survey, which determined that Pulte Mortgage allowed prohibited restrictive covenants to be filed against Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured properties. The objective of our review was to determine the extent to which Pulte Mortgage failed to prevent the…

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…

We audited Luzerne County, PA’s $6 million loan of Community Development Block Grant funds to CityVest that was expected to be used to revitalize the historic Hotel Sterling and surrounding properties. We did the audit because HUD Office of Inspector General audit report 2012-PH-0001 identified this long standing open Block Grant activity and because we received a citizen complaint alleging possible misappropriation of these funds. Our…

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…

We audited the City of Philadelphia, PA’s administration of its Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 grant that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as part of our fiscal year 2012 audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the grantee administered the grant in accordance with Recovery Act and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. We found that the grantee generally…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General reviewed the Aurora Housing Authority to determine whether the Authority obligated its funds by the deadline, adequately managed its procurements and contracts, and accurately reported its Recovery Act information in FederalReporting.gov. We determined that the Authority did not obligate $22,018 of its Recovery Act funds by the March 17, 2010, deadline,…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless in response to a hotline complaint. The complaint contained allegations regarding control weaknesses, resulting in noncompliance with Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP) requirements. The objective of our review was to determine whether the allegations of weaknesses in the Coalition’s…

We audited Four Freedoms House of Philadelphia, Inc.’s management of its Section 202 housing project. We selected Four Freedoms for an audit because we received a complaint alleging that it mismanaged its Section 202 housing project. Our audit objective was to determine whether Four Freedoms managed its Section 202 housing project according to the requirements of its regulatory agreement and applicable HUD requirements. We focused the audit…

As part of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) nationwide effort to review the foreclosure practices of the five largest Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage servicers (Bank of America, Wells Fargo Bank, CitiMortgage, JP Morgan Chase, and Ally Financial, Incorporated) we reviewed Ally Financial, Incorporated’s foreclosure and claims processes. In addition to this memorandum, OIG issued separate memorandums for each of the other…

We audited Luzerne County, PA's administration of its Community Development Block Grant funds that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. We selected the County for an audit because we received a complaint alleging that the County may have misappropriated Block Grant funds and because of our mandate to audit Recovery Act activities. Our audit objective was to determine whether the County obligated, expended…

We audited the Philadelphia Housing Authority’s compliance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) conflict-of-interest and financial disclosure requirements as a result of the Authority’s initial failure to comply with an Office of Inspector General (OIG) subpoena during a previous American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 audit. (HUD OIG audit report number 2011-PH-1010, “The Philadelphia Housing Authority,…

We audited the Allegheny County Housing Authority’s administration of its Public Housing Capital Fund grants that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. We selected the Authority for audit because it received a $7.7 million formula grant and three competitive grants totaling $5.8 million, which was the third largest formula grant and the second largest amount of capital fund competitive grants awarded in…

We audited the City of Reading, PA’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program 2 as part of our annual audit plan to review activities funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) because the City received $5 million in Program funds under the Recovery Act. Our audit objective was to determine whether the City (1) met Program expenditure deadlines, (2) made Program expenditures that were eligible and adequately supported…