The Housing Authority of the City of Springfield, MA, Did Not Always Comply With Procurement and Contract Administration Requirements
We audited the Springfield Housing Authority’s Public Housing Operating Fund and Capital Fund programs because the Authority ranked fifth highest on our risk assessment of Massachusetts public housing agencies and is the third largest in the State. In addition, we had not audited the Authority in more than 10 years.
March 19, 2020
New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, New York, NY, Did Not Always Ensure That Units Met Housing Quality Standards but Generally Abated Payments When Required
We audited the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development’s (HPD) Housing Choice Voucher Program. We selected HPD for review based on its size and because we had not conducted an audit of its Housing Choice Voucher Program. The objective of the audit was to determine whether HPD ensured tha
August 02, 2019
The Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority, Buffalo, NY, Did Not Administer Its Operating Funds in Accordance With Requirements
We audited the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority based on our risk analysis of public housing agencies that fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Buffalo, NY, field office. The objective of our audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its operating funds in accordance with applicable HUD, Federal, and Authority requirements.
September 26, 2018
Glen Cove Housing Authority, Glen Cove, NY, Did Not Always Use Property Disposition Proceeds in Accordance With Requirements
We audited the Glen Cove Housing Authority’s administration of the disposition proceeds it received from selling properties. We selected the Authority for review because the U.S.
January 18, 2018
The New Brunswick Housing Authority, NJ, Did Not Always Administer Its Operating and Capital Funds in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited the New Brunswick Housing Authority because it was classified as a troubled public housing agency and based on our risk analysis of public housing agencies located in the State of New Jersey. The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Authority administered its operating and capital funds in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements.
September 28, 2017
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
The New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority, New Rochelle, NY, Did Not Always Administer Its Public Housing Program in Accordance With HUD’s Rules and Regulations
We completed a review of the New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority’s administration of its public housing program. We selected the Authority based on a management request from the U.S.
January 30, 2017
The Town of Amherst, NY, Did Not Ensure That Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Units Met Housing Quality Standards (REISSUED February 17, 2017)
(REISSUED February 17, 2017)
December 13, 2016
The Tarrytown Municipal Housing Authority, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Procurement, Administrative, and Program Requirements
We audited the Tarrytown Municipal Housing Authority’s administration of its public housing program based on an Office of Inspector General risk assessment. The objectives of the audit were to evaluate the Authority’s financial controls to determine whether (1) U.S.
November 21, 2016