We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, MD’s Housing Choice Voucher Program because we received a complaint alleging that the Authority (1) ignored discrepancies between income information for applicants and program participants and (2) did not properly administer its program.  Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development…

We audited Bank2’s origination of Section 184 Loan Guarantees for Indian Housing program loans.  We selected Bank2’s Section 184 program because (1) an internal audit report and corrective action verification determined that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) lacked proper oversight of the program and lenders did not underwrite loans in accordance with HUD requirements 2) Bank2 is one of the largest Section 184…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General, audited the lender, Berkeley Point Capital, and the underwriting for the Second and Delaware project loan.  We initiated the review of the loan underwriting based on a previous review of the Second and Delaware project, which focused on the construction and development of the project.  The almost $46 million project is Federal Housing Administration (…

We audited the Crisfield Housing Authority’s use of public housing program operating and capital funds because we received a hotline complaint alleging misuse of public housing assets and we had never audited the Authority.  The audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its public housing program in accordance with applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements and its annual…

On April 17, 2018, the Office of Program Enforcement issued a letter stating that it had reached a resolution under a Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986[1] case regarding Summit Bradford Apartments located in Tulsa, OK, following its review.  The Government alleged that the owner submitted 40 false claims under the Act.  The Office of Program Enforcement included with its letter the March 28, 2018, settlement agreement with BSR…

We audited the Crisfield Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because we received a hotline complaint alleging that it misused public housing assets and we had never audited the Authority.  Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority (1) ensured that families met eligibility requirements, (2) properly admitted families from the waiting list, (3) correctly calculated housing assistance payments and maintained…

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…

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Tulsa’s administration of its Section 8 program.  We selected the Authority based on reports generated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Enterprise Income Verification system (EIV).  The Authority had indicators of noncompliance with program requirements.  Specifically, EIV reported an annualized income discrepancy of more than $1.6 million for 328…

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…

We audited the State of Oklahoma because it received $93.7 million in Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) allocations for presidentially declared disasters that occurred in 2011, 2012, and 2013.  The substantial amount of CDBG-DR funding required a review of the State’s program.  Our objective was to determine whether the State obligated and spent its grant in accordance with requirements.  The State…