We audited Luther Towers II because it was a high-risk multifamily project that received low inspection and financial assessment scores on our multifamily risk assessment for projects within our region and we had never audited it. Our audit objective was to determine whether the owner managed the project in accordance with its regulatory agreement and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements.
The Owner of Luther Towers II, Wilmington, DE, Did Not Manage Its HUD-Insured Project in Accordance With Its Regulatory Agreement and HUD Requirements
The City of Olathe, KS, Did Not Always Comply With the Requirements of HUD’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program, Community Development Block Grant Program, and HOME Investment Partnerships Program
The U.S.
Breakthrough Living Program Did Not Administer Its Program in Accordance With HUD Rules and Regulations
The U.S.
Improvements Are Needed Over Environmental Reviews of Public Housing and Recovery Act Funds in the Kansas City Office
We audited the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Kansas City, KS, Office of Public Housing as part of a nationwide audit of HUD’s oversight of environmental reviews. We selected the Kansas City Office based on our risk assessment.
The Wichita, KS, Housing Authority Did Not Always Properly Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Wichita, KS, Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program. We selected the Authority for review because it received more than $12 million in Section 8 funding in both 2011 and 2010. Also, it is one of the largest housing authorities in Kansas and had not been reviewed by HUD OIG.
The Manhattan, KS, Housing Authority Improperly Executed a Contract Change Order and Did Not Accurately Report on Its Recovery Act Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Manhattan, KS Housing Authority’s administration of its Recovery Act capital fund grants.
The Topeka, KS, Housing Authority Did Not Always Document Its Procurement Actions and Did Not Accurately Report on Its Recovery Act Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the Topeka, KS Housing Authority’s administration of its Recovery Act competitive capital fund grants. We selected the Authority for review because it spent a large amount of Recovery Act funds.
The Wilmington, DE, Housing Authority Generally Administered Its Public Housing Capital Fund Recovery Act-Funded Formula and Competitive Grants in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
We audited the Wilmington Housing Authority's administration of its Public Housing Capital Fund Recovery Act-Funded Formula and Competitive Grants that it received under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act).
HUD’s Region VII Office of Community Planning and Development Complied With HUD’s Monitoring Requirements for Recovery Act Recipients
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited HUD’s Region VII Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) to determine whether it complied with HUD’s monitoring requirements for Recovery Act recipients. The Region VII CPD office complied with HUD’s monitoring requirements for Recovery Act recipients.
The State of Kansas Did Not Properly Obligate Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Funds
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, audited the State of Kansas' (State) Neighborhood Stabilization Program I (NSP I). Our audit objectives were to determine whether the State properly obligated its NSP I funds and to determine whether the State's contracts contained all of the required provisions.