We audited the City of Mesa’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program based on (1) a hotline complaint alleging CDBG noncompliance; (2) a prior U.S.
Louisville Metro, Louisville, KY, Did Not Always Administer the TBRA Activity in Its HOME and CoC Programs in Accordance With Program Requirements
We audited the Louisville-Jefferson County Metropolitan Government’s tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) activity in its HOME Investment Partnerships and Continuum of Care (CoC) programs, based on a hotline complaint alleging inappropriate administration of TBRA. In addition, we selected Louisville Metro for review in accordance with the Office of Inspector General’s annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to
March 18, 2019
Hudson County, NJ, Generally Committed and Disbursed HOME Program Funds in Accordance With HUD and Federal Requirements
We audited Hudson County, NJ’s HOME Investment Partnerships program (HOME) as part of the activities in our annual audit plan. We selected the County based on a risk analysis that considered the amount of funding, the risk score assigned to it by the U.S.
January 11, 2018
The Commonwealth of Kentucky Generally Administered Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the Commonwealth of Kentucky’s (Commonwealth) administration of the U.S.
December 20, 2017
The State of New Jersey Did Not Always Disburse Disaster Funds for Its Sandy Homebuyer Assistance Program To Assist Eligible Home Buyers
We audited the State of New Jersey’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery-funded Sandy Homebuyer Assistance program. We conducted the audit because (1) it was the State’s only home-buyer assistance program, (2) the State had spent a high percentage of its allocated funds, and (3) reviews performed by the State auditor and the State’s disaster recovery integrity monitor identified potential issues. Our objective was t
August 14, 2017
Louisville Metro, Louisville, KY, Did Not Always Administer Its HOPWA Program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements
We audited the Louisville-Jefferson County Metropolitan Government’s Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) program. We selected Louisville Metro for review based on a management referral from the U.S.
July 21, 2017
Union County, NJ’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program Was Not Always Administered in Compliance With Program Requirements
We audited Union County, NJ’s HOME Investment Partnerships Program based on a risk analysis of the County’s program that considered the amount of funding, the risk score assigned by the U.S.
January 12, 2017
The City of Camden, NJ, Did Not Ensure That Activities Always Complied With National Objective, Procurement, and Environmental Review Requirements
We audited the City of Camden, NJ’s administration of its Community Development Block Grant program. We conducted the audit because the City was authorized $6.6 million in Block Grant funds for fiscal years 2013 through 2015 and we had not audited its program since 1996. Our audit objective was to determine whether the City ensured that its program activities met national objectives and complied with applicable U.S.
May 24, 2016
The City of Jersey City, NJ’s Community Development Block Grant Program Had Administrative and Financial Control Weaknesses
We completed a review of the City of Jersey City, NJ’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program in response to a hotline complaint. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether allegations included in the complaint had merit and whether City officials had established and implemented adequate controls to ensure that the City’s CDBG program was administered in compliance with CDBG program requirements.
March 30, 2016
The City of Jersey City’s Administration of Its Lead Paint Activities Did Not Comply With Federal and New Jersey State Requirements
We are conducting an audit of the City of Jersey City’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program based upon an Office of Inspector General (OIG) hotline complaint containing several allegations, one of which was that the City’s Division of Community Development’s lead risk assessor was not qualified or producing monitoring reports for rehabilitation work funded under the City’s Homeowner Rehabilitation Program. The objective
February 10, 2016