On April 17, 2018, the Office of Program Enforcement issued a letter stating that it had reached a resolution under a Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 case regarding Summit Bradford Apartments located in Tulsa, OK, following its review. The Government alleged that the owner submitted 40 false claims under the Act.
Corrective Action Verification, City of Tulsa – Community Development Block Grant Land Use and Program Income Audit Report 2008-FW-1012
The Director of the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Oklahoma City Office of Community Planning and Development requested that we perform a corrective action verification of recommendation 1B in audit report 2008-FW-1012, The City of Tulsa, OK, Allowed Its Largest Subrecipient To Expend $1.5 Million in Unsupported CDBG Funding. We expanded the review to include recommendation 1C.
April 10, 2012
As part of the Office of Inspector General’s commitment to ensure the proper use of America Recovery and Reinvestment Act and Housing and Economic Recovery Act funds, we assessed the City of Oklahoma City’s capacity and risks in three areas: internal controls, financial operations, and procurement. Our review did not disclose any reportable conditions or control deficiencies.
June 03, 2010
The City of Atlanta, GA, Needs To Improve Certain Aspects of Its NSP To Meet the Program’s 18-Month Obligation Deadline
The City of Atlanta (City) received a $12.3 million Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) grant from HUD that was authorized under Title III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act. Also, the City applied for an additional $57.9 million in NSP funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
December 13, 2009
The State of Washington Did Not Always Allocate Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Funds Based on Greatest Need
We audited the State of Washington’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program. The audit was part of our fiscal year 2009 annual audit plan. We selected the State because it was responsible for the distribution of funds to the entitlement areas, as well as to nonentitlement areas for the state of Washington. Our objective was to determine whether the State’s Program implementation was compliant with U.S.
September 15, 2009