The Benkelman Housing Authority, Benkelman, NE, Did Not Follow HUD Rules and Regulations for Public Housing Programs Related to Procurement and Maintenance, Tenant Certifications, Laundry Machine Income, and Expenditures
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Benkelman Housing Authority based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General (HUD OIG), Office of Investigation. Additionally, HUD conducted an onsite assessment in May 2016 and identified concerns, including procurement, income verification, travel policy, and significant control…
September 27, 2018
Report
#2018-KC-1004
The Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority, Fairmont, WV, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards and That It Accurately Calculated Housing Assistance Payment Abatements
We audited the Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority did not follow program requirements, (2) the Authority administered 1,117 vouchers and received more than $5.2 million in funding for fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher…
February 15, 2018
Report
#2018-PH-1002
The Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority, Fairmont, WV, Did Not Always Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With Applicable Program Requirements
We audited the Fairmont-Morgantown Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority did not follow program requirements, (2) the Authority administered 1,117 vouchers and received more than $5.2 million in funding for fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority adequately administered its Housing…
February 11, 2018
Report
#2018-PH-1001
The Fairmont Housing Authority Did Not Fully Comply With Procurement Requirements and Spent Funds for Ineligible Expenses
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the Fairmont Housing Authority in Fairmont, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures.
The Authority did not properly…
September 01, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1008
The York Housing Authority Did Not Fully Comply With Procurement Requirements and Spent $21,047 for Ineligible and Unsupported Costs
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the York Housing Authority in York, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures.
The Authority did not properly procure…
August 20, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1006
The Stromsburg Housing Authority Did Not Fully Comply With Procurement Requirements and Spent Funds for Ineligible Expenses
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General audited the Stromsburg Housing Authority in Stromsburg, NE, regarding its procurement and expenditures for its HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing programs. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations and its own policies and procedures for procurement and expenditures.
The Authority did not…
August 20, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1007
The Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority, Charleston, WV, Needs To Improve Its Housing Quality Standards Inspections and Apply Correct Payment Standards When Calculating Housing Assistance Payments
We audited the Charleston-Kanawha Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) it received more than $13.7 million in program funding in fiscal year 2012, (2) it is the largest assisted housing agency in the State of West Virginia, and (3) we had never audited its Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met U.S.…
July 17, 2013
Report
#2013-PH-1005
Housing Choice Voucher Program Units Did Not Meet HUD's Housing Quality Standards, and Authority Officials Did Not Always Comply with HUD's or Their Own Procurement Policy
We audited the Maine State Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program pertaining to its housing quality standard inspections, and other expenditures and procurements using U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funds. Our review was initiated based on a congressional request from Senator Susan Collins. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether (1) the Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program…
September 28, 2012
Report
#2012-BO-1005
Mountain CAP of WV, Inc., Buckhannon, WV, Did Not Administer Its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program in Accordance With Applicable Recovery Act and HUD Requirements
We audited Mountain CAP of WV, Inc.’s administration of its Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program funds. We selected Mountain CAP for audit because of a complaint alleging that controls over its disbursements were weak. Our audit objective was to determine whether Mountain CAP maintained proper financial management of and accountability for its program to ensure that it used the funds according to the American Recovery and…
March 15, 2012
Report
#2012-PH-1008
The West Virginia Housing Development Fund, Charleston, WV, Generally Administered Its Tax Credit Assistance Program Funded Under the Recovery Act in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
We audited the West Virginia Housing Development Fund’s (Fund) Tax Credit Assistance Program (Program) funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) due to a complaint from the Recovery and Transparency Board. We also audited the Fund’s Program because it was the only housing finance agency across the Nation that had not spent any of its Program funds. Our objective was to determine whether the Fund…
March 21, 2011
Report
#2011-PH-1008
The Omaha, Nebraska Housing Authority Did Not Comply With Recovery Act Requirements When Reporting on Recovery Act Capital Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Omaha Nebraska Housing Authority (Authority) to determine whether the Authority (1) obligated Recovery Act grant funds in accordance with Recovery Act requirements and applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules, (2) expended Recovery Act grant funds in accordance with Recovery Act requirements and applicable HUD rules…
September 30, 2010
Report
#2010-KC-1009
The Avesta Housing Management Corporation Did Not Properly Follow HUD Rules and Regulations
We audited the Avesta Housing Management Corporation (Avesta), located in Portland, ME, in response to a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Manchester, NH, Office of Housing field office. The request came after the completion of an Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit of the Orchard Court project. Avesta was the previous manager of Orchard Court and is the current manager of 30 other HUD projects.…
September 03, 2010
Report
#2010-BO-1008
The State of Maine’s Department of Economic and Community Development, Office of Community Development, Has Sufficient Capacity To Effectively Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program
In accordance with our goal to review and ensure the proper administration of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds provided under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) and/or the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), we conducted a capacity review of the operations of the State of Maine’s (State) Department of Economic and Community Development, Office of Community Development (Department). The…
December 15, 2009
Memorandum
#2010-BO-1802
Housing Authorities at Bath and Brunswick, Maine, Overpaid Basic Rent and Housing Assistance Payments for Section 8 Tenants in a Subsidized Multifamily Project (Orchard Court)
We performed an audit of the Orchard Court project, a Section 236 multifamily property, located in Bath, Maine. As part of our audit, we reviewed subsidy payments made to Orchard Court from Bath and Brunswick, Maine, Housing Authorities (Authorities). Our objective was to determine whether Section 8 voucher program subsidies paid to Orchard Court from the Authorities were for basic rent, rather than market rent. Basic rent is the minimum rent a…
January 26, 2009
Memorandum
#2009-BO-1801
Orchard Court Multifamily Project, Located in Bath, Maine, Was Not Properly Managed in Accordance with HUD Regulations
We audited the Orchard Court project, located in Bath, Maine, in response to a referral received by the Office of Inspector General's (OIG) Office of Investigation (Region 1). The referral indicated a potential inappropriate use of project funds by the Orchard Court Housing Corporation (project owner) and/or the management agent. Our overall objective was to determine whether the project owner and/or management agents operated the project…
November 05, 2008
Report
#2009-BO-1002
The Schuyler Housing Authority, Schuyler, Nebraska, Improperly Used Public Housing Funds to Support a Non-HUD Assisted Living Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Schuyler Housing Authority (Authority) to determine whether the Authority improperly spent public housing assets when developing and operating an assisted living program.
We found that the Authority inappropriately used more than $78,000 in public housing funds to pay expenses of a non-HUD assisted living program. In addition, the Authority…
February 19, 2008
Report
#2008-KC-1002
The Douglas County Housing Authority of Omaha, Nebraska, Improperly Encumbered and Spent Its Public Housing Funds
HUD OIG reviewed the development activities of the Douglas County Housing Authority (Authority), Omaha, Nebraska, to determine whether the Authority encumbered or spent U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) assets for nonfederal development activities without HUD approval.
The Authority inappropriately encumbered nearly $1.67 million in federal assets when it entered into loan documents containing setoff provisions against the…
February 10, 2008
Report
#2008-KC-1001
The Maine State Housing Authority, Augusta, Maine, Needs to Improve Controls over Its Administration of the HOME Program
We audited the HOME Investment Partnerships program (HOME) administered by the Maine State Housing Authority, Augusta, Maine (Authority), as part of our annual audit plan. The Authority received more than $21 million in U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding for its federal HOME program from 2005 to 2007. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its HOME program in compliance with HUD…
January 17, 2008
Report
#2008-BO-1003
Oak Mound Associates, Clarksburg, West Virginia, Improperly Billed HUD for Section 8 Subsidies
June 19, 2007
Report
#2007-PH-1007
The State of Nebraska Did Not Close HOME Projects in a Timely Manner
March 13, 2007
Report
#2007-KC-1005