We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) monitoring of its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program grantees under the jurisdiction of the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Baltimore, Maryland, Community Planning and Development (CPD) field offices as part of our annual audit plan. The audit objective was to determine whether those offices adequately monitored their CDBG program grantees to ensure that they...

We audited the Culver City Housing Agency’s (Agency) administration of its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program waiting list and housing assistance payment calculations. We initiated this review based upon information we received regarding waiting list administration and potential tenant eligibility issues. The Agency’s ongoing lease-up deficiency and lack of monitoring visits by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)...

We audited the City of Los Angeles Housing Department (City) as the result of problems noted during a prior audit involving HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME)-funded activities administered by the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles (subrecipient), which was not adequately monitored by the City, compounded by concerns stemming from various newspaper articles related to the Marlton Square project, which included the...

As part of the our plan to review the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (program), we reviewed whether the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Disaster Recovery Grant Reporting system (DRGR) can collect program data at the level of detail necessary to adequately monitor the program. We limited the review to the program established by the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. However, HUD will also use DRGR for the...

We completed a corrective action verification of HUD’s actions in implementing portions of Audit Memorandum 98-AO-219-1804, issued September 24, 1998; Upfront Grant for Ridgecrest Heights Apartments, CEMI-Ridgecrest, Inc., Washington, DC. The specific objective of this corrective action verification review was to determine if HUD ensured the repayment of excess proceeds from the sale of townhomes located at Ridgecrest Heights Apartments. HUD...

We completed an evaluation of HUD’s management of its Workers’ Compensation Program (WCP).  Our primary objectives were to determine whether HUD’s contractor, Lifecare Management Partners (Lifecare) of Alexandria, VA, managed the program in accordance with its contract terms and identify opportunities to improve program policy and procedures.  We also wanted to determine the level of program noncompliance and potential fraud among HUD...

At the request of the Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH), we performed a limited review of a random sample of 112 March and April 2009 Disaster Housing Assistance Program (DHAP) payments for Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita evacuees. The objective was to verify whether the authorized tenants lived in the residences in March and April 2009. Testing identified 20 instances of potentially ineligible payments totaling $9,478 and some...

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited HUD's management of human resources. We initiated the audit based on our annual audit plan and our strategic plan to help HUD resolve its major management challenges. Our objective was to determine whether HUD implemented a process and methodology to determine when to contract out for services or when to keep the services in house. Our...

In response to a request from Senator Charles Grassley, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Finance, we conducted an evaluation of Mortgagee Review Board (MRB/Board) enforcement actions as part of HUD's oversight of Federal Housing Administration (FHA) single-family mortgage lenders. Senator Grassley asked us to update a review of the MRB by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in its 2004 report on FHA risk management. The evaluation...

We completed a review of Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) program's contract documents and other program related representations. Additionally, we reviewed certain business practices related to ensuring that mortgages were insured. We conducted the audit because of OIG senior management's concerns about potential internal control weaknesses in Ginnie Mae's MBS program. Our...

We completed a financial review of the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles' (Authority) Section 8 program. We initiated the review in response to several citizen complaints alleging mismanagement, waste, and abuse of U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Section 8 funding, including the use of Section 8 funds to pay the costs of non-Section 8 programs. Our objective was to determine the validity of the above...

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...

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...

We audited the use of Supportive Housing Program funds by St. Vincent de Paul Village, Inc. (St. Vincent de Paul Village), because it is a large organization receiving more than $4 million in grants annually. Our objective was to determine whether St. Vincent de Paul Village used supportive housing grants in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements and the grant agreements. St. Vincent de Paul Village...

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Native American Program’s (ONAP) rules regarding calculation of program income under the Native American Housing and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA). Our objectives were to determine whether ONAP’s guidance on calculating program income for the NAHASDA-assisted 1937 Act housing projects was consistent with the generally accepted accounting principles. We also...

We audited the City of San Diego's (City) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program in response to a hotline complaint alleging that the City and its Redevelopment Agency (Agency) were violating U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules and regulations. Our main objective was to address the citizen complaint and determine whether the City administered CDBG loans issued to the Agency in accordance with HUD rules and...

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). Our audit objective was to determine whether HUD's receiver provided adequate management oversight to ensure the Authority complied with HUD's requirements. Specifically, to determine whether HUD's receiver ensured that the...

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) processing of its Section 202 and Section 811 capital advances as a part of our annual audit plan. The audit objective was to determine whether HUD's program centers under the jurisdiction of its Region 3 (program centers) processed Section 202 and Section 811 capital advances in accordance with HUD requirements. Program centers did not always process Section 202...

We performed a review of HUD's recent invitation to submit applications (invitation) for performance-based contract administrator services for Southern California to be effective June 1, 2009, and its related annual contributions contract (contract) due to a complaint and concerns that this activity may have been inconsistent with agreed-upon management decisions on Audit Report 2007-SE-0001. The purpose of this review was to determine...

We reviewed the Alameda County HOME Investment Partnership Consortium's use of HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds to determine whether it used its allocation of HOME funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules and regulations. We performed the review because there was a high risk for noncompliance due to a lack of HUD monitoring since 2003. We found that the consortium used $5.6...