Community Action North Bay, Fairfield, CA, Did Not Administer Its Continuum of Care Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited Community Action North Bay’s Continuum of Care Program based on hotline complaints (HC-2016-2275 and HT-2019-1142) and concerns expressed by the San Francisco Office of Community Planning and Development that included matching noncompliance issues. The complaints alleged improper accounting, timekeeping irregularities, unreported program income, and conflicts of interest. Our objective was to determine
January 31, 2020
Tuscan Homes I and II in Hartford, CT, Was Not Always Managed in Accordance With Its Regulatory Agreement and HUD Requirements
We audited Tuscan Homes I and II, a multifamily project located in Hartford, CT, because our risk assessment ranked the project as the highest risk multifamily project in New England. Our audit objective was to determine whether the owner managed the project in accordance with its regulatory agreement and U.S.
September 09, 2019
PK Management, LLC, Richmond Heights, OH, Did Not Always Maintain Documentation Required to Support Housing Assistance Payments
We audited PK Management, LLC, based on (1) media coverage of problems associated with Essex Village, an apartment complex in Virginia that it managed, and (2) issues identified in our prior audit of PK Management in Birmingham, AL. Our audit objective was to determine whether PK Management assisted eligible tenants and maintained documentation to support the housing assistance payments it received for reside
August 02, 2019
Hamilton County, OH, and People Working Cooperatively, Inc., Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements in the Use of Community Development Block Grant Funds for a Housing Repair Services Program
We audited Hamilton County’s subrecipient agreement with People Working Cooperatively, Inc. (corporation), for a Community Development Block Grant-funded housing repair services program based on a request from the U.S.
September 27, 2018
The State of Connecticut Did Not Ensure That Its Grantees Properly Administered Their Housing Rehabilitation Programs
We audited the State of Connecticut’s Small Cities Community Development Block Grant program based on an Office of Inspector General risk assessment, which ranked the State as the highest risk grantee in Connecticut. Our audit objective was to determine whether the State ensured that its grantees properly administered their housing rehabilitation programs. We also assessed various complaints made against the program to determine wh
September 19, 2018
The City of Fresno, CA, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the City of Fresno’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. We selected the City based on prior findings identified by the U.S.
August 09, 2017
The City of Huntington Park, CA, Did Not Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program in Accordance With Requirements
We audited the City of Huntington Park’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. We selected the City based on the high risk assessment score and prior findings identified by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The objective of the audit was to determine whether the City administered its CDBG funds in accordance with HUD requirements, focusing on grant expenditures and procurement.
June 16, 2017
The State of Connecticut Did Not Always Comply With Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Assistance Requirements
We audited the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) assistance grant provided to the State of Connecticut by the U.S.
October 12, 2016
The State of Oklahoma Did Not Obligate and Spend Its Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Funds in Accordance With Requirements
We audited the State of Oklahoma because it received $93.7 million in Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) allocations for presidentially declared disasters that occurred in 2011, 2012, and 2013. The substantial amount of CDBG-DR funding required a review of the State’s program. Our objective was to determine whether the State obligated and spent its grant in accordance with requirements.
September 30, 2016