The State of North Carolina Generally Had Capacity and Mostly Followed Disbursement Requirements, but Its Procurement Process Needs Improvement
We audited the State of North Carolina’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funds. We initiated this audit as part of our commitment to helping the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) address its top management challenges and to support HUD’s strategic objective to support effectiveness and accountability in long-term disaster recovery. Further, Congress has expressed strong interest in…
September 16, 2022
Report
#2022-AT-1002
Summit Construction and Environmental Services, LLC, Richmond, VA Generally Complied With Requirements for Lead-Based Paint Evaluations
We audited Summit Construction and Environmental Services, LLC, because we received an anonymous complaint alleging that Summit Construction (1) did not perform lead-based paint evaluations in a timely manner, (2) did not produce adequate lead-based paint inspection reports in accordance with applicable requirements, and (3) showed favoritism toward certain contractors performing lead-paint inspections. Our objective was to determine…
September 25, 2019
Report
#2019-PH-1005
The Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Charlottesville, VA, Did Not Always Comply With Applicable Procurement Requirements
We audited the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority’s use of public housing operating and capital funds because (1) we received a hotline complaint alleging that the Authority mismanaged its procurement activities and improperly awarded an internet services contract for more than $200,000 without receiving competitive bids and (2) we had never audited the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority…
August 02, 2019
Report
#2019-PH-1002
The North Carolina Department of Commerce Did Not Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Grants as Required by HUD
We audited the North Carolina Department of Commerce’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) grants as part of our annual audit plan because the Department received more than $57 million in NSP1 and NSP3 funding. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Department administered its NSP1 and NSP3 grants in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) requirements.
The Department did not administer…
June 14, 2019
Report
#2019-AT-1004
The City of Hattiesburg, MS, Did Not Always Administer Its HOME Investment Partnerships Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the City of Hattiesburg’s HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) program based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Community Planning and Development’s field office in Jackson, MS, to address a request by the City’s mayor for a comprehensive review of the City’s HOME program. In addition, we selected the City for review in accordance with our annual audit plan. The…
September 28, 2018
Report
#2018-AT-1011
The Greensboro Housing Authority, Greensboro, NC, Generally Administered Its Rental Assistance Demonstration Conversion in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Greensboro Housing Authority’s Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) conversion. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its RAD conversion in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. Specifically, we wanted to determine whether the Authority (1) executed appropriate written agreements, (2) ensured that project financing sources were secured…
May 10, 2018
Report
#2018-AT-1004
The North Carolina Department of Commerce, Raleigh, NC, Generally Administered Its Grant Program in Accordance With HUD Regulations
We audited the North Carolina Department of Commerce’s Small Cities Community Development Block Grant as part of the activities in our annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Department of Commerce (1) awarded funds to local governments that met a CDBG national objective, (2) spent funds only for activities that were eligible and supported, and (3) included all methods of distribution in its action plan.
The…
April 16, 2018
Report
#2018-AT-1003
The Lexington Housing Authority, Lexington, NC, Did Not Administer Its RAD Conversion in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Lexington Housing Authority’s Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) conversion. We selected the Authority based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing and a request from the Housing Authority’s Board of Commissioners. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its RAD program in accordance with HUD…
August 21, 2017
Report
#2017-AT-1011
The Loudoun County Department of Family Services, Leesburg, VA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Loudoun County Department of Family Services’ Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) we received a complaint alleging housing quality standards problems with a housing unit participating in the County’s program, (2) the County had 688 vouchers and received more than $6.4 million in fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the County ensured that its Housing…
June 09, 2017
Report
#2017-PH-1004
The Yorkville Cooperative, Fairfax, VA, Did Not Administer Its HUD-Insured Property and Housing Assistance Contract According to Applicable Requirements
We audited the Yorkville Cooperative’s administration of its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-insured property and housing assistance contract based on a complaint alleging that the Cooperative (1) spent excessive amounts for maintenance and repairs and (2) did not recertify tenants in a timely manner. Our objective was to determine whether the Cooperative administered its HUD-insured property and housing assistance…
May 22, 2017
Report
#2017-PH-1003
The Sanford Housing Authority, Sanford, NC, Did Not Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Sanford Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Programs as a result of problems identified during a technical assistance review performed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing. Additionally, our audit is in keeping with our annual audit plan to ensure that public housing agencies sufficiently administer HUD’s programs in accordance with…
September 13, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1013
Cunningham and Company Settled Alleged Violations of Failing To Comply With Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), investigated Cunningham and Company to determine whether it violated HUD requirements when underwriting loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). Cunningham is an FHA mortgage lender, formerly located in Greensboro, NC. Based on OIG’s review, HUD contends that Cunningham may be liable under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act…
September 08, 2016
Memorandum
#2016-CF-1803
The Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Richmond, VA, Did Not Always Charge Eligible and Reasonable Central Office Cost Center Fees
We audited the fees that the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority charged to its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) housing programs for central office cost center services based on issues identified during our prior audit of the Authority. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority charged fees to its HUD housing programs for central office cost center services that were eligible, reasonable, and…
August 17, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1005
The Members and Operator Did Not Comply With the Executed Regulatory Agreement and HUD’s Requirements for Saltillo Assisted Living, Saltillo, MS
We audited Saltillo Assisted Living (project), an assisted living facility located in Saltillo, MS, based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Departmental Enforcement Center and activities included in our 2015 annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to determine whether the members and operator of Saltillo Assisted Living complied with the executed regulatory agreement and HUD’s requirements…
August 02, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1009
The Sanford Housing Authority, Sanford, NC, Did Not Comply With Procurement and Financial Requirements
We audited the Sanford Housing Authority’s procurement and financial operations. We selected the Authority based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing, following a technical assistance review performed. The technical assistance review identified issues with the Authority’s procurement practices and financial operations, among other items. The…
July 19, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1008
The Housing Authority of the City of Durham, NC, Did Not Adequately Enforce HUD’s and Its Own Housing Quality Control Standards
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Durham’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program’s housing quality standards based on our recent audit of the Authority’s program, during which potential issues with the Authority’s inspections were noted, and as part of our annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that program units met the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD…
May 10, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1005
Saltillo Assisted Living, Saltillo, MS, Did Not Maintain Liability and Property Insurance
We are conducting an audit survey of Saltillo Assisted Living (project) based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Departmental Enforcement Center and the activities included in our 2015 annual audit plan. Our survey objective is to determine whether the owners and management agents of Saltillo Assisted Living complied with the executed regulatory agreement and HUD’s requirements. Our…
December 15, 2015
Memorandum
#2016-AT-1801
The Virginia Housing Development Authority, Richmond, VA, Did Not Always Accurately Report Its Servicing Actions in HUD’s Single Family Default Monitoring System
We audited the Virginia Housing Development Authority’s implementation of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Loss Mitigation program for loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). We conducted the audit because the Authority had the largest active portfolio and the largest number of delinquent loans for servicers located in Virginia as of October 31, 2014. Our objectives were to determine…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-PH-1007
The Housing Authority of the City of Durham, NC, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Durham’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on a hotline citizen complaint and as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own requirements and whether the complaint was valid.
The Authority…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-1011
LoanCare Did Not Always File Claims for Foreclosed-Upon Properties Held on Behalf of Ginnie Mae and Convey Them to FHA in a Timely Manner
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited LoanCare, LLC, Virginia Beach, VA regarding its post-foreclosure activities as a single family master subservicer for the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae). Our objective was to determine whether LoanCare conveyed foreclosed-upon properties held on behalf of Ginnie Mae, filed claims with FHA, and remitted the funds to Ginnie…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-KC-1012