The Detroit Housing Commission, Detroit, MI, Did Not Always Manage Its Program Projects in Accordance With HUD’s Requirements
We audited the Detroit Housing Commission’s Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon a citizen’s complaint alleging mismanagement in the administration of the Commission’s former program projects, Colony Arms and Fisher Arms Apartments. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Commission appropriately (1) maintained…
August 26, 2015
Report
#2015-CH-1002
Prudential Huntoon Paige Associates, LTD, Did Not Underwrite and Process a $22 Million Loan in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited Prudential Huntoon Paige Associates, LTD’s underwriting of a $22.8 million mortgage loan to refinance Lafayette Towers Apartments, a 584-unit highrise multifamily project in Detroit, MI. We initiated the review based on the early default, assignment, and significant amount of the project. Our objective was to determine whether Prudential underwrote and processed the loan for Lafayette Towers according to the U.S.…
August 14, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-1007
The Owner and Former Management Agents Lacked Adequate Controls Over the Operation of Lake Village of Fairlane Apartments, Dearborn, MI
We audited Lake Village of Fairlane Apartments as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the project based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Detroit Office of Multifamily Housing Programs. Our objective was to determine whether the project’s owner and former management agents operated the project in accordance with HUD’s requirements and the…
September 30, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1012
The Owner and Former Management Agents Lacked Adequate Controls Over the Operation of Lake Village of Auburn Hills, Auburn Hills, MI
We audited the Lake Village of Auburn Hills multifamily project as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the project based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Detroit Office of Multifamily Housing. Our objective was to determine whether the project’s owner and former management agents operated the project in accordance with the regulatory agreement…
September 29, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1010
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Detroit Office
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Detroit Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Detroit Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Detroit Office’s oversight of public housing environmental reviews within its jurisdiction ensured that (1) the responsible entities performed…
September 24, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0005
The Pontiac Housing Commission, Pontiac, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Pontiac Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission complied with Federal, State, or its own requirements regarding its Family Self-Sufficiency program and conflicts of interest.
The Commission did not always administer its Family Self-Sufficiency…
September 12, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1009
The Ferndale Housing Commission, Ferndale, MI, Generally Administered Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Household Files in accordance With HUD's and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Ferndale Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon an analysis of risk factors related to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objectives were to determine whether the Commission appropriately (1) calculated housing assistance payments, (2) maintained required…
September 11, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1008
The Jackson Housing Commission, Jackson, MI, Needs To Improve Its Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Jackson Housing Commission’s Section 8 program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based on our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its program in accordance with HUD’s and its own program requirements.
The Commission generally…
August 29, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1007
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, or Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund competitive grant. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
April 30, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1003
The City of Detroit, MI, Lacked Adequate Controls Over Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program-Funded Demolition Activities Under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008
We audited the City of Detroit’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program-funded demolition activities under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. We selected the City based on a request from the Office of Inspector General’s Office of Investigation to work jointly with it on the assignment. Our objectives were to determine whether the City complied with Federal regulations in its (1) maintenance of accounting records for…
January 05, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1002
The City of Flint, MI Lacked Adequate Controls Over Its Home Investment Partnerships Program
We audited the City of Flint’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program. We selected the City based upon our analysis of risk factors related to Program grantees in Region 5’s1 jurisdiction. Our objectives were to determine whether the City complied with Federal requirements and its own requirements in the administration of its Program. This is the third of three audit reports on the City’s Program.
The City did not ensure…
November 14, 2013
Report
#2014-CH-1001
The Michigan State Housing Development Authority, Lansing, MI, Did Not Follow HUD’s Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Program
We audited the Michigan State Housing Development Authority’s multifamily project-based Section 8 program for new-regulation projects as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based on a referral from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) management. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with HUD’s requirements…
September 30, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1011
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus formula grant. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s1 jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
September 30, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1012
The Flint Housing Commission, Flint, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Flint Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund formula grant based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD), and its own requirements. …
September 27, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1009
Independent Bank, Ionia, MI, Generally Complied With HUD’s Quality Control and Underwriting Requirements
We audited Independent Bank, a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) supervised direct endorsement lender. We selected Independent Bank for review based on its overall compare ratio of nearly 200 percent for loans originated in our jurisdiction for a 2-year FHA performance period. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether (1) Independent Bank’s quality…
September 17, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1007
The State of Michigan Lacked Adequate Controls Over Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
We audited the State of Michigan’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 annual audit plan. We selected the State’s Program based upon our designation of the Program as high risk. Further, we received an anonymous complaint regarding the State’s Program. Our objectives were to determine whether the Michigan State Housing…
September 15, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1006
The State of Maryland, Crownsville, MD, Generally Administered Its Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program According to Applicable HUD Requirements
We audited the State of Maryland’s Department of Housing and Community Development’s administration of its Emergency Mortgage Assistance program. We audited the State’s program because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) awarded the State $61.6 million in Emergency Homeowner’s Loan program funds to administer its Emergency Mortgage Assistance program. Our objective was to determine whether the State…
August 08, 2013
Report
#2013-PH-1006
The Inkster Housing Commission, Inkster, MI, Did Not Follow HUD’s Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Programs
We audited the Inkster Housing Commission’s public housing and Section 8 programs as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2013 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based on a citizen’s complaint to our office and our analysis of risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its programs in accordance with HUD’s and its own…
August 01, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1004
Madison Park North Apartments Generally Ensured That Procurement and Reserve for Replacement Requirements Were Met
We audited the procurement process of Madison Park North Apartments, a Section 236 property, at the request of the Director of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Baltimore Office of Multifamily Housing Programs. We also reviewed Madison’s Park’s use of its reserve for replacement account. Madison Park generally ensured that procurement and reserve for replacement account requirements were met. However, it did not…
April 19, 2013
Report
#2013-PH-1003
New Day Financial, LLC, Fulton, MD, Ensured Loans Met FHA Requirements
We reviewed 32 Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans that New Day Financial, LLC, underwrote as a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) FHA direct endorsement lender. We conducted the review as a result of a risk model assessment that identified mortgage lenders that were at high risk to cause losses to the FHA insurance fund. New Day was one of the lenders identified that made insurance claims within the first 2 years of…
March 07, 2013
Memorandum
#2013-PH-1802