U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know

The .gov means it’s official.

Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure.

The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

The Saginaw Housing Commission, Saginaw, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audited the Saginaw Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon our previous audits of its use of Federal funds and a request from HUD management to perform a comprehensive review of its programs. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission operated its program in accordance with HUD’s and its own requirements.

The Flint Housing Commission, Flint, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grants in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD's, and Its Own Requirements

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Flint Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund competitive grants. We selected the Commission 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 grants in accordance with Recovery Act, HUD’s, and its own requirements. This is the first of two planned audit reports on the Commission’s Recovery Act grants.

The Allegheny County Housing Authority, Pittsburgh, PA, Needs To Improve Its Inspections To Ensure That All Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Units Meet Housing Quality Standards

We audited the Allegheny County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) the Authority received more than $27.3 million in Housing Choice Voucher funding in fiscal year 2011, (2) an article in the October 22, 2011, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette described housing quality standards problems with a housing unit participating in the Authority’s program, and (3) we had never audited the Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met the U.S.

The Buffalo, NY, Municipal Housing Authority Did Not Always Administer Its Recovery Act Capital Fund Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements

We audited the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority’s Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (Formula) program funded under the Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 based on an Office of Inspector General risk analysis and the amount of funding the Authority received. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether Authority officials (1) procured contracts in accordance with U.S.

The Hammond Housing Authority, Hammond, IN, Did Not Administer Its Recovery Act Grants in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Hammond Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus formula and competitive grants. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors related to the housing agencies in Region V’s jurisdiction.

The Gallia Metropolitan Housing Authority, Bidwell, OH, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance with Recovery Act and HUD Requirements

We audited the Gallia Metropolitan Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) grant. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V’s (see footnote 1) jurisdiction and a request by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Public and Indian Housing.

Opelousas Housing Authority, Opelousas, LA, Did Not Always Comply With Recovery Act and Federal Obligation, Procurement, and Reporting Requirements

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General initiated an audit of the Opelousas Housing Authority’s Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus Recovery Act-funded grant as part of our annual audit plan.

The Sanford Housing Authority Lacked Adequate Management of and Controls Over Its Public Housing and Section 8 Programs

We audited the Sanford Housing Authority (Authority) to assess certain issues raised in a congressional referral. The referral alleged improper use or mismanagement of the Authority’s public housing, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program funds.

The Springfield Housing Authority, Springfield, IL, Needs To Improve Its American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Contract Administration Procedures

We audited the Springfield Housing Authority’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus formula grant. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, U.S.

Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority, Cleveland, OH, Did Not Operate Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program According to HUD’s Requirements

We audited the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Authority based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region V’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with applicable U.S.