Search

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), assisted the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern and Western Districts of Washington in the civil investigation of Universal American Mortgage Company, LLC.  Our investigation was ongoing when a qui tam action was filed in the U.S.

HUD OIG assisted the U.S.

We reviewed the City of Albuquerque, Department of Family and Community Services’ Continuum of Care program.  We initiated the review based on a complaint alleging misconduct in the City’s program.  Specifically, the complainant alleged the City’s Continuum of Care failed to comply with conflict of interest and procurement requirements, did not maintain accurate Homeless Management Information System reports, and expended funds for i

We assisted the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Kentucky in the investigation of NDC Real Estate Management, Inc. (NDC).  The investigation began due to a qui tam filing in the U.S.

We conducted a review of Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program payments made to Deandra Caison, a landlord, for a tenant residing in a property that Ms. Caison no longer owned.  Ms.

We reviewed the City of Apalachicola’s Small Cities Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funded by the State of Florida for a marina improvements project in response to a hotline complaint.  The complaint was submitted to the U.S.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), conducted a review of Section 8 housing assistance payments made to Lynn Leggins, a landlord, for a tenant with whom he lived. The objective of our review was to determine whether Mr. Leggins received housing assistance payments that he was not eligible to receive.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General conducted a capacity review of the Ft. Belknap Indian Community (Ft. Belknap) to determine whether there was evidence that Ft. Belknap lacked the capacity to adequately administer its Recovery Act funding in accordance with requirements.

We reviewed the County because it received more than $19 million in NSP funds and in 2008, HUD rated the County’s HOME program as high risk. Our objectives were to determine whether the County had the capacity to effectively and efficiently administer its NSP and whether it accurately reported HOME commitments within HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS).

We reviewed the County because it received more than $19 million in NSP funds and in 2008, HUD rated the County’s HOME program as high risk. Our objectives were to determine whether the County had the capacity to effectively and efficiently administer its NSP and whether it accurately reported HOME commitments within HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS).