Glenbrook Manor Could Not Always Show That Project Costs Were Eligible and Supported in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the multifamily project, Glenbrook Manor, in Stamford, CT, based on a request by officials from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Hartford, CT, Office of Multifamily Housing Programs. Our audit objectives were to determine whether Glenbrook Manor expended project funds for eligible activities and costs that were reasonable and supported, and whether surplus cash was properly calculated and deposited…
December 15, 2014
Report
#2015-BO-1001
The Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, CT Took Appropriate Action to Resolve a Complaint While Complying With Procurement Regulations
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, doing business as Charter Oak Communities. We received an anonymous complaint against the Authority related to an alleged improper procurement. The complainant alleged that Authority officials awarded a contract to an employee’s spouse without following procurement and conflict-of-interest requirements. In addition, a previous audit (Audit report number 2012-BO-1002…
September 26, 2014
Memorandum
#2014-BO-1801
Authority Officials Did Not Always Follow HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, to address complaints and areas that came to our attention during a prior audit. Our objective was determine whether costs charged to Federal housing programs were eligible, reasonable, and supported. Specifically, we determined whether officials properly (1) charged development staff costs, (2) charged Section 8 consulting costs, (3) implemented flat rents, (4) loaned…
July 31, 2014
Report
#2014-BO-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, Did Not Always Ensure That Expenses Charged to Its Federal Programs Were Eligible, Reasonable, and Supported
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Hartford, CT, field office. HUD officials were concerned about the Authority due to significant financial deficiencies that were not corrected in a timely manner. Our audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials ensured that expenses charged to Federal programs were…
January 23, 2014
Report
#2014-BO-1001
Utah Housing Corporation Did Not Always Properly Determine Borrower Eligibility for FHA’s Preforeclosure Sale Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Utah Housing Corporation to determine whether the Corporation properly determined that borrowers were eligible to participate in FHA’s Preforeclosure Sale Program. We selected the Corporation because it had more preforeclosure sales than regular foreclosures, placing it at the top of our risk assessment for Region VIII.
The Corporation did…
May 15, 2013
Report
#2013-DE-1001
Ofori & Associates, PC, Hartford, CT, Did Not Always Comply With Its REO Contract and Marketing Plan Requirements
We audited Ofori & Associates, PC, regarding its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) real estate-owned (REO) Management and Marketing (M&M) III program. This review was part of the Office of Inspector General’s efforts to improve the integrity of the single-family insurance program. Our audit objective was to determine whether Ofori complied with case processing requirements and timeframes to obtain the highest net…
February 18, 2013
Report
#2013-BO-1001
Prysma Lending Group, LLC, Danbury, CT, Complied With HUD-FHA Loan Origination and Quality Control Requirements
We audited Prysma Lending Group, LLC, a nonsupervised lender, located in Danbury, CT, in support of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) goal of improving the integrity of the single-family insurance program. We selected Prysma for audit because its 3.28 percent default rate for Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured single-family loans with beginning amortization dates between…
November 13, 2012
Memorandum
#2013-BO-1801
A Hotline Complaint About Utah Housing Corporation, West Valley City, UT,
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited the Utah Housing Corporation in response to a hotline complaint. The complaint contained allegations that the Corporation commingled funds from the FHA first mortgages and the downpayment assistance second mortgages and serviced the second mortgages before the FHA first mortgages by using the first mortgage payments to pay the second mortgage. The…
September 27, 2012
Report
#2012-DE-1005
The Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, CT, Did Not Properly Administer and Oversee the Operations of Its Federal Programs
We audited the Housing Authority ofthe City of Stamford, CT's administration of its Federal housing programs based on an anonymous complaint. Federal programs included Operating Fund, Section 8 programs (including the Housing Choice Voucher program, Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program, and Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy
program), and Capital Fund programs. The Authority was also awarded an American Recovery…
March 14, 2012
Report
#2012-BO-1002
Corrective Action Verification of prior audit finding on procurement
We performed a corrective action verification review of the audit recommendations made on the procurement practices of the Housing Authority of the City of Danbury for finding 5 of Audit Report Number 2004-BO-1004, issued December 5, 2003. This review was based on a complaint. The purpose of the review was to determine whether the selected audit recommendations were implemented and the deficiencies cited in the report were corrected.
The…
January 05, 2012
Memorandum
#2012-BO-1801
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant (hotline complaint)
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Hartford’s (the Authority’s) administration of its American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant that funded a construction management contract based on a hotline complaint. Our objective was to determine if the Authority solicited, evaluated, and administered the $2.5 million grant funding and associated contract (the contract) properly and in accordance with federal requirements. We also visited…
January 05, 2012
Report
#2012-BO-1001
Mountain States Mortgage Center, Sandy, UT, Did Not Follow HUD’s Underwriting, Quality Control, and Advertising Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited Mountain States Mortgage Center to determine whether it underwrote insured loans in compliance with HUD requirements and whether its quality control plan met HUD requirements.
Mountain States underwrote 41 loans that did not comply with FHA requirements. Of the 41 FHA-insured loans reviewed, one of the loans had a significant underwriting…
July 22, 2011
Report
#2011-DE-1004
The Housing Authority of the City of New Haven, CT, Could Not Show That It Always Complied With Environmental and Labor Standards Enforcement Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of New Haven’s (Authority) Public Housing Capital Fund (Capital Fund) and American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 Capital Fund (Recovery Act Capital Fund) projects for compliance with environmental and labor law requirements. We initiated this assignment because a previous Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit of the Authority’s Recovery Act Capital Fund activities identified a significant…
June 10, 2011
Report
#2011-BO-1008
Blue Mountain Hospital, Blanding, UT, a HUD Section 242 Insured Mortgagee, Did Not Have Adequate Written Procedures for Its Project Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, reviewed Blue Mountain Hospital (Hospital) based on a request from the Office of Healthcare Programs.
The objective of our review was to determine whether the Hospital had adequate written procedures for collecting, dispersing, and accounting for project funds. The Hospital did not have adequate written procedures for collecting, disbursing, and accounting…
June 02, 2011
Report
#2011-DE-1002
The Housing Authority of the City of New Haven, CT, Did Not Support Cost Reasonableness for More Than $1.4 Million or Properly Obligate $60,000 of Its Capital Fund Stimulus Recovery Act Grant
We selected the Housing Authority of the City of New Haven (Authority), a Moving to Work agency, because it obligated a majority of its $6 million in Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act Funded grant (grant) received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) just before the required obligation deadline. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (I) obligated its Recovery Act…
December 16, 2010
Report
#2011-BO-1003
The Housing Authority of the County of Salt Lake, UT, Properly Expended Its Recovery Act Capital Grant Funds, But Did Not Properly Obligate All Of The Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, We reviewed the Housing Authority of the County of Salt Lake’s (Authority) Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act Funded grant (grant) based on a risk assessment we completed and the results of a monitoring review performed by the Denver Office of Public Housing.
The objective was to determine whether the Authority properly obligated…
September 24, 2010
Report
#2010-DE-1007
The Manchester Housing Authority in Manchester, CT, Obligated Its Recovery Act Grant Funds in a Timely Manner for Eligible Projects and Properly Suported Expenditures
We audited the Manchester Housing Authority (Authority) in Manchester, CT, because it obligated the majority of its $520,654 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (Formula) Recovery Act Funded grant awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) just before the required obligation deadline. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) obligated its grant funds in a timely manner for eligible…
September 21, 2010
Report
#2010-BO-1009
Webster Bank, Cheshire, CT, Did Not Properly Underwrite a selection of FHA Loans
We conducted a review of Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans underwritten by Webster Bank (Webster), an FHA direct endorsement lender. This review was conducted as part of our “Operation Watchdog” initiative to review the underwriting of 15 direct endorsement lenders at the suggestion of the FHA Commissioner. The Commissioner expressed concern regarding the increasing claim rates against the FHA insurance fund for failed loans. The…
September 01, 2010
Memorandum
#2010-NY-1805
The Hartford Housing Authority's Plan To Replace Boilers Did Not Meet Recovery Act and Federal Efficiency Requirements
We audited the Hartford Housing Authority (Authority) because it was awarded a $5 million Public Housing Capital Fund grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) and obligated the majority of the grant just before the required obligation deadline. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (1) had adequate management controls over its obligation process, (2) maintained support for obligations, and (…
July 21, 2010
Report
#2010-BO-1005
The City of Ogden, UT, Appropriately Administered the HOME Investment Partnerships Program
The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Inspector General reviewed the City of Ogden, UT’s (City) HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) to determine whether the City effectively established HOME projects, ensured that HOME funds were used for eligible HOME expenses, and properly monitored the HOME projects.
The City appropriately established HOME projects, used HOME funds for eligible HOME expenses, and…
April 02, 2010
Report
#2010-DE-1003