Determine whether the households residing in the Authority’s project-based voucher units, that bypassed others on the wait lists, received housing in accordance with the program’s requirements and if not, consider a referral to HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity.
2017-AT-1011 | August 20, 2017
The Lexington Housing Authority, Lexington, NC, Did Not Administer Its RAD Conversion in Accordance With HUD Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-AT-1011-001-LOpenClosedClosed on March 22, 2019
2017-BO-1006 | August 17, 2017
The West Warwick Housing Authority, West Warwick, RI, Needs To Improve Its Compliance With Federal Regulations for Its Housing Choice Voucher and Public Housing Programs
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-BO-1006-001-AOpenClosed$2,063,351Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on September 11, 2023Provide documentation to support that $2,063,351 was spent for reasonable and necessary costs. Any amount that cannot be supported should be repaid to the Housing Choice Voucher or public housing programs from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-BO-1006-001-BOpenClosed$2,752Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on December 19, 2017Reimburse the Housing Choice Voucher and public housing programs $2,752 from non-Federal sources for improper conflict-of-interest purchases.
- Status2017-BO-1006-001-COpenClosed$6,100Funds Put to Better Use
Recommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Closed on April 26, 2018Deobligate $6,100 from the asbestos abatement procurement and redistribute the funds to the public housing programs for eligible purposes.
- Status2017-BO-1006-001-DOpenClosedClosed on April 17, 2018
Develop and implement procurement policies and procedures that comply with Federal, State, and local laws.
- Status2017-BO-1006-001-EOpenClosedClosed on April 26, 2018
Develop and implement controls to ensure that contracts are in place when applicable.
- Status2017-BO-1006-001-FOpenClosedClosed on April 26, 2018
Develop and enforce written conflict-of-interest requirements in compliance with Federal rules and regulations.
- Status2017-BO-1006-001-GOpenClosedClosed on April 26, 2018
Develop and maintain a contract management system, including a contract register for all procurements.
- Status2017-BO-1006-001-HOpenClosedClosed on December 19, 2017
Evaluate the training of West Warwick’s board of commissioners and determine whether additional training is required or other changes are appropriate.
- Status2017-BO-1006-002-AOpenClosedClosed on January 18, 2018
.Develop and implement written policies and procedures to ensure that each Housing Choice Voucher program tenant file has an appropriately documented rent reasonableness determination.
- Status2017-BO-1006-002-BOpenClosedClosed on April 02, 2018
Develop and implement written policies and procedures to ensure that each public housing unit has an annual inspection, which is appropriately documented in the tenant file.
- Status2017-BO-1006-002-COpenClosed$12,820Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on June 12, 2019Determine whether tenants were underpaid for utility allowances and if so, reimburse the tenants from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-BO-1006-002-DOpenClosedClosed on December 19, 2017
Evaluate the training of West Warwick employees and determine what additional training is necessary..
- Status2017-BO-1006-003-AOpenClosed$18,501Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on November 16, 2018Provide documentation to support that $18,501 in credit card charges was spent for reasonable and necessary costs. Any amount that cannot be supported should be repaid from non-Federal funds and returned to the Housing Choice Voucher and public housing programs.
- Status2017-BO-1006-003-BOpenClosed$4,530Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on November 16, 2018Provide documentation to support that $4,530 in petty cash funds was spent for reasonable and necessary costs. Any amount that cannot be supported should be repaid from non-Federal funds and returned to the Housing Choice Voucher and public housing programs.
- Status2017-BO-1006-003-COpenClosedClosed on November 16, 2018
Develop and maintain property records and conduct an inventory in accordance with Federal regulations.
2017-AT-1010 | August 03, 2017
The Louisville Metro Housing Authority, Louisville, KY, Did Not Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
Public and Indian Housing
- Status2017-AT-1010-001-AOpenClosed$70,992Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on March 15, 2019Reimburse the program $70,992 ($63,312 $7,680) from non-Federal funds for housing assistance payments made and administrative fees received for the units that materially failed to meet HUD’s housing quality standards.
- Status2017-AT-1010-001-BOpenClosedClosed on March 15, 2019
Certify, along with the owners of the 103 units cited in the finding, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected.
- Status2017-AT-1010-001-COpenClosedClosed on March 27, 2019
Develop and implement adequate policies and procedures for conducting quality control inspections in accordance with HUD’s requirements.
- Status2017-AT-1010-001-DOpenClosed$20,566,345Funds Put to Better Use
Recommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Closed on March 15, 2019Develop and implement adequate procedures and controls to ensure that its quality control inspection program functions properly to include adequately monitoring the inspection contractor to prevent $20,566,345 in program funds from being spent over the next year on units that do not materially comply with requirements.