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.

Hotline

Crime, Fraud, Waste, and Abuse

The Housing Authority of the City of Michigan City, Indiana, Failed to Follow Federal Requirements for Its Nonprofit Development Activities

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Authority of the City of Michigan City's (Authority) nonprofit development activities. The review of public housing authorities' development activities is set forth in our annual audit plan. We selected the Authority because it was identified as having high-risk indicators of nonprofit development activity.

Holyoke Housing Authority's, Holyoke, Massachusetts, Lack of Management Controls Resulted in Section 8 Units Not Meeting Housing Quality Standards

Attached is the report on our audit of the Holyoke Housing Authority's (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) program , Audit Report Number 2008-BO-1002, dated November 26, 2007. We audited the Holyoke Housing Authority's (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) program as part of our fiscal year 2007 audit plan. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority's Section 8 housing units met housing quality standards (HQS) in accordance with U.S.

The Municipality of Caguas, Puerto Rico, Needs to Improve Controls over Its Section 8 Program

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 Municipality of Caguas (authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Our audit objectives were to determine whether Section 8 units met housing quality standards in accordance with HUD requirements and whether the authority properly determined housing assistance subsidies. Of the 10 units inspected, eight (80 percent) did not meet minimum housing quality standards, and three of those were in material noncompliance.

The Manhattan, KS, Housing Authority Improperly Executed a Contract Change Order and Did Not Accurately Report on Its Recovery Act Funds

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Manhattan, KS Housing Authority’s administration of its Recovery Act capital fund grants. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority executed a contract change order in compliance with HUD procurement regulations and the Authority’s procurement policy and accurately and completely reported Recovery Act grant information in FederalReporting.gov. The Authority improperly executed a contract change order.

The Topeka, KS, Housing Authority Did Not Always Document Its Procurement Actions and Did Not Accurately Report on Its Recovery Act Funds

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Topeka, KS Housing Authority’s administration of its Recovery Act competitive capital fund grants. We selected the Authority for review because it spent a large amount of Recovery Act funds.

The Aurora Housing Authority Did Not Always Follow Requirements When Obligating, Expending, and Reporting Information About Its Recovery Act Capital Funds

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General reviewed the Aurora Housing Authority to determine whether the Authority obligated its funds by the deadline, adequately managed its procurements and contracts, and accurately reported its Recovery Act information in FederalReporting.gov.

The HUD Phoenix Field Office's Procedures for Monitoring the Nogales Housing Authority Were Not Adequate

We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Public Housing field office in Phoenix, Arizona (Public Housing). The objective of the audit was to determine whether Public Housing’s procedures for monitoring the Nogales Housing Authority (Authority) were effective. The audit was started because Public Housing performed several monitoring reviews at the Authority; however, there were indications that some of the problems found had not been corrected.

The Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles Generally Had Capacity; However, It Needs To Improve Controls Over Its Administration of Its Capital Fund Grant Awarded Under The Recovery Act Program

We completed a capacity review of the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles’ (Authority) capital fund grant awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) program. We performed the audit because Recovery Act reviews are part of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) annual plan and the Authority was awarded a significant amount of program funds.

The Housing Authority of the City of Napa Did Not Adequately Determine and Support Section 8 Rents

In response to a hotline complaint, we reviewed the Housing Authority of the City of Napa's (the Authority) Section 8 program. The purpose was to determine whether concerns raised in the complaint relating to misappropriation of Section 8 funds had merit and whether allegations of improper rent increases for the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy (Mod Rehab) and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher programs were valid.

Subscribe to Public and Indian Housing