Review of HUD's Internal Controls over Processing of Personnel Actions
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Administration's internal controls over the processing of personnel actions in response to an anonymous complaint received by our office. Our objectives were to determine why (1) human resource actions were not processed in a timely manner, (2) employee requests to waive the automatic collection of payroll overpayments were not processed before collection…
April 15, 2009
Report
#2009-FO-0004
Quincy Housing Authority, Quincy, Massachusetts, Housing Choice Voucher Program Needs to Improve Controls over Its Interprogram Fund Transactions, Procurement, and Travel
We audited the Housing Choice Voucher program (Voucher program) at the Quincy Housing Authority (Authority) as part of our annual audit plan. Our efforts focused on whether the Authority (1) ensured that its Section 8 administrative plan met the requirements of 24 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 982.54, (2) adequately accounted for its indirect cost charges, (3) used Voucher program funds only for the administration of the program and whether…
April 09, 2009
Report
#2009-BO-1006
The State of Connecticut Department of Social Services Did Not Always Properly Determine or Support Tenant Eligibility and Rent Calculations for the Housing Choice Voucher Program
We initiated this audit as part of our annual audit plan to determine whether the State of Connecticut Department of Social Services (agency) properly administered its Housing Choice Voucher program (Voucher program) in compliance with its annual contributions contracts and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. Our objectives focused on whether tenant eligibility, rent determinations, and annual reexaminations were…
April 08, 2009
Report
#2009-BO-1005
The Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Needs to Improve Its Procedures and Controls Regarding Its Homeownership Programs
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee's (Authority) 5(h) and Section 32 homeownership programs (programs). We selected the Authority based on a risk analysis showing that it had high-risk program indicators. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority properly accounted for and used its programs' proceeds in…
April 08, 2009
Report
#2009-CH-1006
HUD Could Not Demonstrate That Its Receivership Improved the Housing Authority of New Orleans' Performance
At the request of two United States senators, we initiated an audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) administration of the Housing Authority of New Orleans (Authority) to determine the effect of HUD's receivership on the Authority's performance. Specifically, we wanted to determine whether HUD had taken action to improve the Authority's post-Hurricane Katrina performance while under HUD…
April 08, 2009
Report
#2009-AO-0003
The City of Augusta, Georgia, Did Not Comply with HOME Monitoring Requirements
HUD OIG performed an audit of the City of Augusta's HOME Investment Partnerships program as part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's annual audit plan. The purpose of the audit was to determine whether the City complied with HOME program requirements for monitoring (1) HOME community housing development organizations and subrecipients and (2) the use of CHDOs' proceeds. This is the second of two audit reports…
April 01, 2009
Report
#2009-AT-1005
The City of Durham, North Carolina, Did Not Adequately Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program
We audited the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program administered by the City of Durham, North Carolina (City). The objective of the audit was to determine whether the City administered its program in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. We selected the City for review based on HUD's risk assessment and previous monitoring reviews.
The City did not administer its CDBG program in…
March 31, 2009
Report
#2009-AT-1004
SAR 61 - Semiannual Report to Congress for period ending March 31, 2009
The Inspector General Act of 1978 requires the Inspector General to prepare semiannual reports summarizing the activities of the Office of Inspector General for the preceding six month periods. The semiannual reports are intended to keep the Secretary and the Congress fu
March 31, 2009
Semiannual report
#SAR 61
The Owners of Stonerook Apartments Phase I and Phase II, Baytown, Texas, Violated Their Regulatory Agreements With HUD
We audited Stonebrook Apartments Phase I and Phase II (projects) to determine whether the projects' owners complied with the regulatory agreements and U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. Specifically, we wanted to determine whether the owners (1) made unauthorized distributions of project funds when the projects were in a non-surplus-cash position, (2) fully funded the tenant security deposit accounts, and (…
March 25, 2009
Report
#2009-FW-1007
The City of Norfolk, Virginia, Did Not Ensure That Program Income Was Returned to Its HOME Program as Required
We audited the City of Norfolk's (City) HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) program based on a request from the Community Planning and Development Division in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Richmond, Virginia, field office. Our audit objective was to determine whether the City properly administered its HOME program by following HUD requirements related to homebuyer assistance, modernization rehabilitation…
March 20, 2009
Report
#2009-PH-1007
Campaige Place at Jackson, Phoenix, Arizona, Did Not Use Its Project Funds in Compliance with HUD’s Regulatory Agreement and Other Federal Requirements
We audited Campaige Place at Jackson (Campaige Place) to determine whether it used its project funds in compliance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) regulatory agreement and other federal requirements.
Campaige Place did not use its project funds in compliance with HUD’s and other federal requirements. Specifically, we determined that:
•Owner advances of $73,750 were repaid when the project had no surplus cash…
March 18, 2009
Report
#2009-LA-1008
The Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, Maryland, Did Not Comply with HUD and State of Maryland Lead-Based Paint Requirements in a Timely Manner
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis' (Authority) management of lead-based paint in its public housing units in response to a citizen complaint. The audit objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and State of Maryland (State) requirements for inspecting and abating lead-based paint hazards in its public housing units.
The Authority did not…
March 05, 2009
Report
#2009-PH-1006
The City of Yonkers, New York, Had Weaknesses in the Administration of its Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program
We audited the City of Yonkers, New York's (the City) administration of its Section 108 Loan Guarantee program to determine whether the City disbursed Section 108 loan guarantee program funds for eligible costs and adequately safeguarded funds and prevented misuse. The audit disclosed that the City disbursed program funds for eligible activities in accordance with HUD rules and regulations, and maintained a financial management system that…
March 05, 2009
Report
#2009-NY-1009
The City of Yonkers, New York, Had Weaknesses in the Administration of its Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program
March 05, 2009
Report
#2009-NY-1009
The East St. Louis, Illinois, Housing Authority’s Section 8 Voucher Program Units Did Not Always Meet HUD’s Housing Quality Standards
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Choice Voucher program of the East St. Louis Housing Authority (Authority). Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority's Section 8 program units met the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) housing quality standards. We found that seventy-nine percent of the Authority's Section 8…
March 01, 2009
Report
#2009-KC-1005
The Housing Authority of the City of Brush, Colorado, Did Not Perform Contracting Activities in Accordance with Federal Procurement Requirements
The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Authority of the City of Brush, Colorado (Authority) because we received information indicating there were irregularities in the Authority's procurement process. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority performed contracting activities in accordance with federal procurement requirements.
The Authority did not…
February 24, 2009
Report
#2009-DE-1002
The Puerto Rico Housing Finance Authority Generally Calculated Housing Assistance Correctly
As part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General's (OIG) strategic plan, we audited the Puerto Rico Housing Finance Authority's (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority properly determined housing assistance subsidies, properly determined the eligibility of tenants, and recertified tenants in a timely manner.…
February 24, 2009
Report
#2009-AT-1003
The City of Newburgh, New York, Did Not Always Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program in Accordance with HUD Requirements
We completed an audit of the City of Newburgh, New York's administration of its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The objectives of our audit were to determine whether the City (1) administered its CDBG program effectively, efficiently, and economically in accordance with applicable rules and regulations, and (2) expended CDBG funds for eligible activities that met a national objective of the program.
The audit disclosed…
February 23, 2009
Report
#2009-NY-1008
The City of Los Angeles Housing Department Did Not Always Ensure That Its HOME-Assisted Rehabilitation Work Was Complete and in Accordance with HOME Requirements
We audited the City of Los Angeles Housing Department (Department) as a result of an earlier audit of the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) affordability monitoring requirements and inspections of HOME-assisted rental units, which detected four projects that may not have been rehabilitated as intended. Our audit objective was to determine whether HOME funds were used as intended to rehabilitate the four projects and in accordance with…
February 19, 2009
Report
#2009-LA-1007
The Chicago Housing Authority, Chicago, Illinois, Did Not Always Ensure That Section 8 Units Met HUD's Housing Quality Standards
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Chicago Housing Authority's (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program) under its Moving to Work Demonstration program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2008 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V's…
February 18, 2009
Report
#2009-CH-1005