The Housing Authority of the City of San Buenaventura, San Buenaventura, California, Did Not Manage HUD Program Funds in Accordance with HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of San Buenaventura (Authority) in response to a hotline complaint alleging mismanagement and misuse of U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority's financial activities, operations, and controls complied with HUD requirements. We found that the Authority did not use program funds in accordance with the requirements of its…
May 27, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1010
The Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Richmond, Virginia, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
Attached is the final report on our audit of the Richmond Redevelopment and Housing Authority (Authority), Richmond, Virginia, Audit Report Number 2008-PH-1006, dated April 15, 2008. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Authority adequately managed its waiting list, met HUD's lease-up thresholds, and operated its Family Self-Sufficiency program according to HUD requirements. The Authority's Housing Choice Voucher program was…
April 14, 2008
Report
#2008-PH-1006
The Housing Authority of the County of San Joaquin, Stockton, California, Did Not Administer Capital Funds in Accordance with HUD Requirements
We reviewed the Housing Authority of the County of San Joaquin's (the Authority) capital fund program to determine whether it used capital funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rules and regulations. The Authority did not use capital funds in accordance with requirements. Specifically, the Authority used $175,775 to absorb shared administrative costs of other housing programs, improperly charged $114,…
March 04, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1008
The Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, Did Not Adequately Administer Its Section 8 Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles’ (Authority) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority determined tenant eligibility and performed annual reexaminations in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. Although we did not identify any tenants that were not eligible for the program, the Authority did not comply with HUD’s requirements or its own administrative plan…
February 06, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1007
Phoenix Apartments Did Not Use Project Funds in Compliance with HUD Requirements
Based on a hotline complaint, we reviewed whether the Phoenix Apartments multifamily project located in Concord, California, used its project funds in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. We found that the project did not use project funds in accordance with the requirements of its regulatory agreement and applicable HUD rules and regulations. Specifically, during fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006, the project used $89,751 of its funds…
February 02, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1006
The Anaheim Housing Authority, Anaheim, California, Did Not Always Operate Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Effectively
We audited the Anaheim Housing Authority’s (Authority) tenant eligibility and reexamination policies and procedures for its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority followed HUD rules and regulations in determining tenant eligibility, rent calculations, and rent reasonableness. Although we did not identify any tenants that were not eligible for the Authority’s…
January 14, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1005
The City of Los Angeles Housing Department Did Not Adequately Monitor HOME Program-Assisted Rehabilitation Construction
We audited the City of Los Angeles Housing Department’s (Department) single-family and small multifamily property rehabilitation programs funded by the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME program) as part of our annual audit plan. The objectives of our audit were to determine whether the Department (1) effectively monitored construction bids, costs, and quality; (2) ensured that borrowers and properties met eligibility requirements for…
January 13, 2008
Report
#2008-LA-1004
Homes for Life Foundation, Los Angeles, California, Did Not Properly Administer Its Supportive Housing Program Grants
December 16, 2007
Report
#2008-LA-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Napa Did Not Adequately Determine and Support Section 8 Rents
November 28, 2007
Report
#2008-LA-1002
The Los Angeles Multifamily Hub Did Not Properly Monitor Its Performance-Based Contract Administrator, Los Angeles LOMOD
We audited the Los Angeles Multifamily Hub's monitoring of its annual contributions contract with its performance-based contract administrator (contractor), Los Angeles LOMOD (LOMOD). Our overall audit objective was to determine whether the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) appropriately monitored LOMOD with respect to the annual contributions contract. The Los Angeles Multifamily Hub did not properly monitor its contractor…
November 03, 2007
Report
#2008-LA-0001
The Newport News Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Newport News, Virginia, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
July 23, 2007
Report
#2007-PH-1009
The Newport News Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Newport News, Virginia, Did Not Always Follow HUD Requirements
February 18, 2007
Report
#2007-PH-1005
Oakland Housing Authority Did Not Comply with Procurement and Contracting Requirements
February 12, 2007
Report
#2007-LA-1005