The Grand Rapids Housing Commission, Grand Rapids, MI, Did Not Always Correctly Calculate and Pay Housing Assistance for Units Converted Under the Rental Assistance Demonstration
We audited the Grand Rapids Housing Commission’s Rental Assistance Demonstration program (RAD) based on the activities included in our 2017 annual audit plan and our analysis of the housing agencies participating in RAD in Region 5’s jurisdiction (States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin). Our audit objective was to determine whether the Commission correctly calculated housing assistance payments for the units…
June 11, 2018
Report
#2018-CH-1001
The Greensboro Housing Authority, Greensboro, NC, Generally Administered Its Rental Assistance Demonstration Conversion in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Greensboro Housing Authority’s Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) conversion. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its RAD conversion in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. Specifically, we wanted to determine whether the Authority (1) executed appropriate written agreements, (2) ensured that project financing sources were secured…
May 10, 2018
Report
#2018-AT-1004
The Sanford Housing Authority, Sanford, NC, Did Not Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Sanford Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Programs as a result of problems identified during a technical assistance review performed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) North Carolina State Office of Public Housing. Additionally, our audit is in keeping with our annual audit plan to ensure that public housing agencies sufficiently administer HUD’s programs in accordance with…
September 13, 2016
Report
#2016-AT-1013
The Lansing Housing Commission, Lansing, MI, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements and Its Own Policies Regarding the Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Lansing Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction and the activities included in our 2015 annual audit plan. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Commission (1) appropriately calculated housing assistance payments, (2) maintained eligibility documentation required to support the…
December 15, 2015
Report
#2016-CH-1002
The Housing Authority of the City of Durham, NC, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Durham’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on a hotline citizen complaint and as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) and its own requirements and whether the complaint was valid.
The Authority…
September 30, 2015
Report
#2015-AT-1011
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Detroit Office
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Detroit Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Detroit Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Detroit Office’s oversight of public housing environmental reviews within its jurisdiction ensured that (1) the responsible entities performed…
September 24, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0005
The Pontiac Housing Commission, Pontiac, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Pontiac Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission complied with Federal, State, or its own requirements regarding its Family Self-Sufficiency program and conflicts of interest.
The Commission did not always administer its Family Self-Sufficiency…
September 12, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1009
The Jackson Housing Commission, Jackson, MI, Needs To Improve Its Administration of Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Jackson Housing Commission’s Section 8 program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based on our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its program in accordance with HUD’s and its own program requirements.
The Commission generally…
August 29, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1007
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Greensboro Office
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Greensboro, NC, Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Greensboro Office based on our risk assessment. Our audit objectives were to determine whether the Greensboro Office of Public Housing ensured that it performed the required reviews and did not release funds until all requirements…
July 14, 2014
Report
#2014-FW-0004
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, or Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund competitive grant. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of the risk factors relating to public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
April 30, 2014
Report
#2014-CH-1003
The Housing Authority of the City of Lumberton, NC, Did Not Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With Requirements
We initiated a review of the Housing Authority of the City of Lumberton, NC, at the request of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Greensboro, NC, Office of Public Housing. HUD staff described many areas of concern, including cash management, procurement, and inventory controls. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority operated its public housing program in accordance with HUD and other Federal…
December 04, 2013
Report
#2014-AT-1002
The Hamtramck Housing Commission, Hamtramck, MI, Did Not Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Hamtramck Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus formula grant. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s1 jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban…
September 30, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1012
The Flint Housing Commission, Flint, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Flint Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund formula grant based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grant in accordance with Recovery Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD), and its own requirements. …
September 27, 2013
Report
#2013-CH-1009
The Flint Housing Commission, Flint, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Grants in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD's, and Its Own Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Flint Housing Commission’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Public Housing Capital Fund competitive grants. We selected the Commission based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to the housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our objective was to determine whether the Commission administered its grants in accordance with…
September 27, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-0013
The Saginaw Housing Commission, Saginaw, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audited the Saginaw Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon our previous audits of its use of Federal funds and a request from HUD management to perform a comprehensive review of its programs. Our objective…
September 27, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-1012
The Saginaw Housing Commission, Saginaw, MI, Did Not Administer Its Grant in Accordance With Recovery Act, HUD’s, and Its Requirements
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 (…
January 25, 2012
Report
#2012-CH-1002
The Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina Did Not Follow Some Requirements for Its Native American Housing Block Grants Received Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
We selected the tribe for audit because it received a $4.7 million formula grant and a $4 million competitive grant, the largest Native American Housing Block Grants awarded in North Carolina under the Recovery Act. Our objective was to determine whether the tribe administered its Native American Housing Block Grants in compliance with Recovery Act and other applicable requirements, specifically, whether it had (1) expended funds on a timely…
December 05, 2011
Report
#2012-AT-1003
The Pontiac Housing Commission, Pontiac, MI, Did Not Adequately Administer Its American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Capital Fund Grant
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Pontiac Housing Commission’s Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act Funded grant. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2010 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission for review as part of the Office of Inspector’s General’s commitment to ensure the proper use of Recovery Act funds. Our objective was to…
September 30, 2011
Report
#2011-CH-1018
The Saginaw Housing Commission, Saginaw, MI, Did Not Fully Implement Prior Audit Recommendations and Continued To Use Its Public Housing Program Funds for Ineligible Purposes
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Inspector General audited the Saginaw Housing Commission’s Public Housing program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon our previous audit report on the Commission’s use of public housing funds, audit report number 2006-CH-1018, issued September 28, 2006, and an indication that the Commission was…
August 09, 2011
Report
#2011-CH-1012
The Greensboro Housing Authority Needs To Improve Internal Controls for Administering Recovery Act Funds
We audited the Greensboro Housing Authority (Authority) as part of our annual plan to review public housing capital funds awarded under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). The Authority received a $5.6 million Public Housing Capital Fund Stimulus (formula) Recovery Act Funded grant, the second highest in the State. It also received a Recovery Act funded $1.05 million capital fund competitive grant for addressing…
July 21, 2011
Report
#2011-AT-1013