The Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, MD, Did Not Always Properly Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, MD’s Housing Choice Voucher Program because we received a complaint alleging that the Authority (1) ignored discrepancies between income information for applicants and program participants and (2) did not properly administer its program. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development…
August 14, 2019
Report
#2019-PH-1004
The Tacoma, WA, Housing Authority Generally Satisfied RAD Requirements but Did Not Follow Its Moving to Work Policy by Conducting Annual Tenant Reexaminations for Its RAD Converted Units
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Tacoma Housing Authority’s participation in the Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) because it had the highest number of completed RAD units and the second highest number of total RAD units in HUD’s Region 10. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority executed the appropriate written agreements for RAD, ensured that…
December 21, 2018
Report
#2019-SE-1001
The Crisfield Housing Authority, Crisfield, MD, Did Not Properly Administer Its Public Housing Program Operating and Capital Funds
We audited the Crisfield Housing Authority’s use of public housing program operating and capital funds because we received a hotline complaint alleging misuse of public housing assets and we had never audited the Authority. The audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its public housing program in accordance with applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements and its annual…
September 25, 2018
Report
#2018-PH-1007
The Spokane, WA, Housing Authority Did Not Follow Permanent Relocation Requirements for Its RAD Conversion of the Parsons Apartments
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Spokane Housing Authority due to the Authority’s participation in the Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD), which was a priority for the Office of Audit. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority followed relocation requirements during its RAD conversion of the Parsons Apartments.
We found that The Authority did not…
April 24, 2018
Report
#2018-SE-1001
The Crisfield Housing Authority, Crisfield, MD, Did Not Properly Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Crisfield Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because we received a hotline complaint alleging that it misused public housing assets and we had never audited the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority (1) ensured that families met eligibility requirements, (2) properly admitted families from the waiting list, (3) correctly calculated housing assistance payments and maintained…
March 30, 2018
Report
#2018-PH-1003
The Housing Authority of Snohomish County, Everett, WA, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Project-Based Voucher Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General selected the Housing Authority of Snohomish County for audit based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Labor Standards Enforcement in Seattle, WA. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority executed Agreements To Enter Into Housing Assistance Payments Contract (forms HUD-52531-A and…
September 29, 2017
Report
#2017-SE-1002
The Housing Opportunities Commission of Montgomery County, Kensington, MD, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Housing Opportunities Commission of Montgomery County’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) it had a large program receiving more than $82 million in fiscal year 2015, (2) it had the second largest number of housing choice vouchers of non-Moving to Work housing agencies within the jurisdiction of the Philadelphia region, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the…
September 29, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1008
The Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, MD, Did Not Always Follow Applicable Procurement Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis’ procurement activities due to a hotline complaint. The complaint alleged that the Authority failed to follow procurement requirements. This is the second of two audit reports on the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority procured services and products using operating and capital funds in accordance with applicable requirements.
The…
September 27, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1007
The Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, MD, Did Not Always Administer Its Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency Program in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis’ Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) program due to a hotline complaint. The complaint alleged that the Authority used ROSS grant funds to pay a resident who did not work on a grant. This is the first of two audit reports on the Authority. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its ROSS program in accordance with applicable U.S…
August 31, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1006
The Yakama Nation Housing Authority Did Not Always Properly Spend Its Recovery Act funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited how the Yakama Nation Housing Authority used its nearly $4.9 million Native American Housing Block Grant provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Our objectives were to determine whether the Authority properly spent its Recovery Act funds, correctly obtained small purchases, and properly reported Recovery Act…
April 29, 2014
Report
#2014-SE-1002
Vancouver, WA, Housing Authority Did Not Always Manage or Report on Recovery Act Funds in Accordance With Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Vancouver Housing Authority to determine whether it was managing and reporting its three awarded Recovery Act Capital Fund grants in accordance with requirements. We selected the Authority because it was part of our annual audit plan, which includes reviewing funds provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
The Authority did not…
December 20, 2011
Report
#2012-SE-1002
The Bellingham Whatcom County Housing Authorities, Bellingham, WA, Generally Complied With American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Capital Fund Grant Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited the Bellingham Whatcom County Housing Authorities to determine whether expenditures for American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Capital Fund Grants were appropriate, eligible, and adequately supported and whether related procurements were made in accordance with 24 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 85 and Recovery Act requirements. We selected…
October 14, 2011
Report
#2012-SE-1001
King County Housing Authority, Tukwila, WA, Generally Complied With Recovery Act Capital Fund Competition Grant Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited King County Housing Authority to determine whether its expenditures for three Recovery Act Capital Fund Competition Grants were appropriate, eligible, and adequately supported and whether related procurements were made in accordance with 24 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 85 and Recovery Act requirements. We selected the Authority because it…
July 20, 2011
Report
#2011-SE-1007
The Housing Authority of Baltimore City, MD, Generally Administered Its Recovery Act Captial Fund Grants in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
We audited the Housing Authority of Baltimore City’s (Authority) administration of its Public Housing Capital Fund grants that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). We selected the Authority for audit because it received a $32.7 million formula grant, which was the largest formula grant awarded in the State of Maryland. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered…
September 20, 2010
Report
#2010-PH-1013
The Elkton Housing Authority, Elkton, MD, Did Not Comply With HUD Regulations in Obligating and Disbursing Recovery Act Capital Funds
We audited the Elkton Housing Authority (Authority) because it received Public Housing Capital Fund Recovery Act grant (grant) funding as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). Our objective was to determine whether the Authority obligated and disbursed capital funds received under the Recovery Act according to the requirements of the act and applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)…
May 03, 2010
Report
#2010-PH-1007
Seattle Housing Authority’s Capacity To Administer Recovery Act Funding Under the Capital Fund Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General conducted a capacity review of Seattle Housing Authority’s (Authority) capital fund to determine whether there was evidence that the Authority lacked the capacity to adequately administer its Recovery Act funding in accordance with requirements. Our review of the Authority was limited to gaining an understanding of internal controls over the…
April 21, 2010
Memorandum
#2010-SE-1801
The Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis, Maryland, Did Not Comply with HUD and State of Maryland Lead-Based Paint Requirements in a Timely Manner
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Annapolis' (Authority) management of lead-based paint in its public housing units in response to a citizen complaint. The audit objective was to determine whether the Authority complied with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and State of Maryland (State) requirements for inspecting and abating lead-based paint hazards in its public housing units.
The Authority did not…
March 05, 2009
Report
#2009-PH-1006
Housing Authority of Baltimore City, Maryland, Did Not Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards under Its Moving to Work Program
We audited the Housing Authority of Baltimore City's (Authority) administration of its leased housing under its Moving to Work Demonstration (Moving to Work) program based on our analysis of various risk factors relating to the housing authorities under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Baltimore field office. This is the second audit report issued on the Authority's program. The…
September 12, 2008
Report
#2008-PH-1013
The Richland Housing Authority, Richland, Washington, Did Not Adequately Account for Housing Choice Voucher Funds
At HUD's request, we audited the Housing Choice Voucher program of the Richland Housing Authority (Authority). HUD was concerned about the results of an audit of the Authority performed by the Washington State Auditor's Office. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority made ineligible purchases with program funds. We found that the Authority did not track its program expenses. Also, it charged more than $57,000 in…
July 07, 2008
Report
#2008-SE-1006
Renton Housing Authority, Renton, Washington, Overpaid Rental Assistance And Did Not Have Sufficient Controls Over Rent Reasonableness
We audited Renton Housing Authority (Authority), Renton, Washington. The review was initiated due to a hotline complaint from a Housing Choice Voucher program recipient. The complainant stated that the contract rent was unreasonable because it exceeded the rent for comparable unassisted units on the premises. The audit objective was to determine whether the complaint was valid. We also wanted to determine whether the Authority had controls in…
June 03, 2008
Report
#2008-SE-1005