The Housing Authority of the City of Easton, PA, Did Not Always Properly Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Easton, PA’s Housing Choice Voucher Program because (1) we received a complaint alleging that the Authority made improper payments to program participants and a consultant to the Authority inappropriately placed herself on the program waiting list and (2) we had never audited the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program
July 30, 2019
Report
#2019-PH-1001
The Little Rock Housing Authority, Little Rock, AR, Did Not Fully Meet Rental Assistance Demonstration Program Requirements
We audited the Little Rock Housing Authority’s Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD program). We initiated this assignment due to the U.S.
April 23, 2019
Report
#2019-FW-1001
The Adams County Housing Authority, Gettysburg, PA, Did Not Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program According to HUD Requirements
We audited the Adams County Housing Authority because (1) a news article reported that the executive director received an excessive salary and practiced nepotism, (2) we received a complaint alleging nepotism and potential misuse of Federal funds, and (3) we had never audited the Authority. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its program according to applicable U.S.
September 19, 2018
Report
#2018-PH-1005
The Chester Housing Authority, Chester, PA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Chester Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because (1) it recently regained control of its operations after 20 years in receivership, (2) it had 1,566 vouchers and received more than $14.9 million in fiscal year 2016, and (3) we had not audited its program. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority ensured that its Housing Choice Voucher program units met the U.S.
September 28, 2017
Report
#2017-PH-1007
The Boston Housing Authority, Boston, MA, Housed Eligible Tenants and Correctly Calculated Voucher Subsidies
We audited the Housing Choice Voucher program at the Boston Housing Authority because of the size of the program, the time that had elapsed since our last audit, and the inherent program risk. The Authority operates the second largest Housing Choice Voucher program in New England. In addition, our office had not audited any Authority program since 2010. The Housing Choice Voucher program is inherently risky as Congress designed it
April 05, 2017
Report
#2017-BO-1004
The Housing Authority of the County of Salt Lake Did Not Always Procure Goods and Services in Accordance With Applicable Requirements
The U.S.
August 17, 2016
Report
#2016-DE-1001
The Somerville Housing Authority, Somerville, MA, Did Not Always Support Its Allocation of Costs to Asset Management Projects
We audited the Somerville Housing Authority’s public housing and Public Housing Capital Fund programs as part of our fiscal year 2016 regional audit plan. We initiated our review because the U.S.
August 12, 2016
Report
#2016-BO-1004
The Westmoreland County Housing Authority, Greensburg, PA, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards and That It Accurately Calculated Housing Assistance Payment Abatements
We audited the Westmoreland County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program because the U.S.
April 27, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1002
The Westmoreland County Housing Authority, Greensburg, PA, Did Not Properly Manage Its Housing Choice Voucher Waiting List and Select Applicants as Required
We audited the Westmoreland County Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program. We selected the Authority for audit because the U.S.
January 12, 2016
Report
#2016-PH-1001
The Virgin Islands Housing Authority, St. Thomas, VI, Did Not Adequately Enforce HUD’s Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Virgin Islands Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program’s housing quality standards as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2015 audit plan. We selected the Authority because it had a large program receiving more than $14 million in 2014.
December 07, 2015
Report
#2016-AT-1001