St. Francis Hospital, Inc., Did Not Comply With the Executed Regulatory Agreement and Federal Regulations for the HUD Section 242 Program
We audited St. Francis Hospital, Inc. because the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Hospital Facilities, requested immediate assistance from HUD’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) to review suspected violations of the hospital’s regulatory agreement and rider (including covenants). Our objective was to determine whether the hospital complied with the executed regulatory agreement and HUD requirements for…
September 02, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-1009
The Housing Authority of the City of Comer Did Not Comply With Conflict-of-Interest and Procurement Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Comer’s financial and procurement operations. We selected the Authority based on concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Georgia State Office of Public Housing regarding significant deficiencies identified during its August 2013 management review. HUD’s Office of Public Housing identified findings regarding the misuse of funds, a lack of governance…
April 23, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-1002
Glenbrook Manor Could Not Always Show That Project Costs Were Eligible and Supported in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the multifamily project, Glenbrook Manor, in Stamford, CT, based on a request by officials from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Hartford, CT, Office of Multifamily Housing Programs. Our audit objectives were to determine whether Glenbrook Manor expended project funds for eligible activities and costs that were reasonable and supported, and whether surplus cash was properly calculated and deposited…
December 14, 2014
Report
#2015-BO-1001
The Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, CT Took Appropriate Action to Resolve a Complaint While Complying With Procurement Regulations
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, doing business as Charter Oak Communities. We received an anonymous complaint against the Authority related to an alleged improper procurement. The complainant alleged that Authority officials awarded a contract to an employee’s spouse without following procurement and conflict-of-interest requirements. In addition, a previous audit (Audit report number 2012-BO-1002…
September 25, 2014
Memorandum
#2014-BO-1801
Authority Officials Did Not Always Follow HUD Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, to address complaints and areas that came to our attention during a prior audit. Our objective was determine whether costs charged to Federal housing programs were eligible, reasonable, and supported. Specifically, we determined whether officials properly (1) charged development staff costs, (2) charged Section 8 consulting costs, (3) implemented flat rents, (4) loaned…
July 30, 2014
Report
#2014-BO-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, Did Not Always Ensure That Expenses Charged to Its Federal Programs Were Eligible, Reasonable, and Supported
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Bridgeport, CT, based on a request from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Hartford, CT, field office. HUD officials were concerned about the Authority due to significant financial deficiencies that were not corrected in a timely manner. Our audit objective was to determine whether Authority officials ensured that expenses charged to Federal programs were…
January 22, 2014
Report
#2014-BO-1001
Ofori & Associates, PC, Hartford, CT, Did Not Always Comply With Its REO Contract and Marketing Plan Requirements
We audited Ofori & Associates, PC, regarding its U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) real estate-owned (REO) Management and Marketing (M&M) III program. This review was part of the Office of Inspector General’s efforts to improve the integrity of the single-family insurance program. Our audit objective was to determine whether Ofori complied with case processing requirements and timeframes to obtain the highest net…
February 17, 2013
Report
#2013-BO-1001
Prysma Lending Group, LLC, Danbury, CT, Complied With HUD-FHA Loan Origination and Quality Control Requirements
We audited Prysma Lending Group, LLC, a nonsupervised lender, located in Danbury, CT, in support of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) goal of improving the integrity of the single-family insurance program. We selected Prysma for audit because its 3.28 percent default rate for Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured single-family loans with beginning amortization dates between…
November 12, 2012
Memorandum
#2013-BO-1801
The Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, CT, Did Not Properly Administer and Oversee the Operations of Its Federal Programs
We audited the Housing Authority ofthe City of Stamford, CT's administration of its Federal housing programs based on an anonymous complaint. Federal programs included Operating Fund, Section 8 programs (including the Housing Choice Voucher program, Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program, and Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy
program), and Capital Fund programs. The Authority was also awarded an American Recovery and…
March 13, 2012
Report
#2012-BO-1002
The Housing Authority of the City of Sparta, GA, Did Not Maintain Adequate Control Over Its Federal Funds
January 22, 2012
Report
#2012-AT-1006
DeKalb County, GA, Had Inadequate Controls Over the Support for Commitments Entered in HUD’s Information System
We audited DeKalb County’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program because it received more than $8 million in HOME funding since 2008. Our objective was to determine whether the County accurately entered commitments and project completion data into HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System.
The County did not require that the signatures of all parties who signed written agreements be dated to support whether the commitments were…
January 07, 2012
Report
#2012-AT-1004
Corrective Action Verification of prior audit finding on procurement
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…
January 04, 2012
Memorandum
#2012-BO-1801
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant (hotline complaint)
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…
January 04, 2012
Report
#2012-BO-1001
The Housing Authority of the City of New Haven, CT, Could Not Show That It Always Complied With Environmental and Labor Standards Enforcement Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of New Haven’s (Authority) Public Housing Capital Fund (Capital Fund) and American Reinvestment and Recovery Act of 2009 Capital Fund (Recovery Act Capital Fund) projects for compliance with environmental and labor law requirements. We initiated this assignment because a previous Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit of the Authority’s Recovery Act Capital Fund activities identified a significant…
June 09, 2011
Report
#2011-BO-1008
The Georgia Department of Community Affairs, Atlanta, GA, Paid for Some Unsupported Program Participants
HUD OIG performed an audit of the Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program at the Georgia Department of Community Affairs. The audit was part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) national mandate to oversee and audit grant activities funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). We selected the Georgia Department of Community Affairs…
June 06, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1009
The Housing Authority of the City of New Haven, CT, Did Not Support Cost Reasonableness for More Than $1.4 Million or Properly Obligate $60,000 of Its Capital Fund Stimulus Recovery Act Grant
We selected the Housing Authority of the City of New Haven (Authority), a Moving to Work agency, because it obligated a majority of its $6 million in Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act Funded grant (grant) received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) just before the required obligation deadline. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority (I) obligated its Recovery Act…
December 16, 2010
Report
#2011-BO-1003
The City of Columbus, GA, Demonstrated the Capacity to Obligate Its NSP-1 Funds
November 22, 2010
Memorandum
#2011-AT-1801
The East Point Housing Authority Made Excessive Housing Assistance Payments for a Zero-Income Tenant and Its Units Did Not Meet Housing Quality Standards
November 20, 2010
Report
#2011-AT-1002
Pine State Mortgage Corporation, Atlanta, GA, Did Not Properly Underwrite a selection of FHA Loans
We conducted a review of 20 Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans underwritten by Pine State Mortgage Corporation (Pine State), an FHA direct endorsement lender. This review was conducted as part of our “Operation Watchdog” initiative to review the underwriting of 15 direct endorsement lenders at the suggestion of the FHA Commissioner. The Commissioner expressed concern regarding the increasing claim rates against the FHA insurance fund…
September 28, 2010
Memorandum
#2010-NY-1808
The City of Augusta, GA, Demonstrated the Capacity To Obligate Its NSP1
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General conducted a review of the City of Augusta, GA’s (City) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP1) to determine whether the City had demonstrated the capacity to properly obligate all NSP1 grant funds and at least 25 percent of the grant toward occupants with incomes below 50 percent of the median income in the locality (LH25) set-aside by the September 5,…
September 23, 2010
Memorandum
#2010-AT-1806