The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited HUD's Office of Public Housing and Voucher Programs to determine whether HUD reasonably ensured that public housing agencies properly managed their housing choice voucher net restricted assets and to determine whether HUD appropriately awarded 2009 set-aside fund awards for unforeseen circumstances and higher than average leasing.

We initiated the audit of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) efforts to recover the City of New London, CT, Housing Authority (Authority) due to its longstanding troubled status. The Authority has had significant management deficiencies for more than 10 years, and HUD identified the Authority as “overall troubled” in May of 2004.

We completed a corrective action verification review of the audit recommendations for findings 1 and 2 of Audit Report Number 2006-NY-1005, issued February 21, 2006 pertaining to the general operations of the Utica Municipal Housing Authority, Utica, New York (Authority). The purpose of the corrective action verification was to determine whether the selected audit recommendations were implemented and the deficiencies cited in the report were corrected.

We audited the Shelby County Housing Authority in Memphis, TN, based upon an audit request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General for Investigation. The request included many areas of concern for both public housing operations and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program administration.

We audited the Saginaw Housing Commission’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 Commission based upon our previous audits of the Commission’s use of Federal funds and a request to perform a comprehensive review of its programs from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) management.

HUD OIG audited the Housing Authority of the City of Fort Lauderdale’s (Authority’s) administration of its Public Housing Capital Fund grants under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. This was an OIG-initiated audit in accordance with OIG’s 2010-2015 strategic plan to contribute to the effective use of Federal funds allocated by the Recovery Act.

We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Hartford’s (the Authority’s) administration of its American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant that funded a construction management contract based on a hotline complaint. Our objective was to determine if the Authority solicited, evaluated, and administered the $2.5 million grant funding and associated contract (the contract) properly and in accordance with federal requirements. We also visited a sample of sites to evaluate the impact the grant had on housing.

We performed a corrective action verification review of the audit recommendations made on the procurement practices of the Housing Authority of the City of Danbury for finding 5 of Audit Report Number 2004-BO-1004, issued December 5, 2003. This review was based on a complaint. The purpose of the review was to determine whether the selected audit recommendations were implemented and the deficiencies cited in the report were corrected. The corrective action verification found that the Authority did not effectively implement recommendations 5A and 5E in the prior audit report.