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.


We audited the Housing Authority of the City Long Beach’s Housing Choice Voucher Program based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Los Angeles Office of Public Housing due to concerns regarding its financial activity control weaknesses.  The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its Housing Choice Voucher Program in accordance with Program requirements, with an emphasis on its financial transactions, cost and payroll allocations, contracting, and procurement.

The Authority did not follow Program requirements under 2 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 200 and 24 CFR 982 in administering its Housing Choice Voucher Program.  It did not adequately support or perform overhead allocations, follow procurement requirements, or ensure that costs were eligible.  As a result, HUD had no assurance that Housing Choice Voucher Program funds totaling more than $2.4 million were appropriately used for the operation of the Program.  In addition $5,648 was not used for eligible Program expenses.

We recommend that the Director of the Los Angeles Office of Public Housing require the Authority to (1) develop and implement a HUD-approved cost allocation plan(s), (2) support the reasonableness of more than $1.9 million in overhead allocations[1] or repay the Housing Choice Voucher Program from non-Federal funds, (3) determine how much of the general operating costs applied to the Housing Choice Voucher Program and repay potential overcharges (estimated at $50,947) to the Program from non-Federal funds, (4) support or repay $25,827 in personnel expenses and $64,150 for accounting services that applied to other programs from non-Federal funds, (5) support the reasonableness of the $340,701 Casterline and $33,415 Genesis contract amounts or repay the Program from non-Federal funds, (6) implement additional written procurement and contracting policies and procedures, and (7) repay the Housing Choice Voucher Program for $5,648 in unallowable expenses from non-Federal funds.

[1]     The Authority reimbursed $183,251 to the Housing Choice Voucher program, but did not adequately indicate to which of the questioned costs it was applicable.  Offsets to the questioned costs may be applied once a correct allocation and reconciliation is performed.