Bank2, Oklahoma City, OK, Originated Loans Reviewed in Accordance with Section 184 Loan Guarantees for Indian Housing Program Processing Guidelines
We audited Bank2’s origination of Section 184 Loan Guarantees for Indian Housing program loans. We selected Bank2’s Section 184 program because (1) an internal audit report and corrective action verification determined that the U.S.
July 11, 2019
The City of Chattanooga, TN, Did Not Always Administer Its ESG Program in Accordance With HUD’s Requirements
We audited the City of Chattanooga’s Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program. We selected the City for review in accordance with our annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to determine whether the City administered its ESG program in accordance with HUD’s requirements.
September 28, 2017
The Housing Authority of the City of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, Did Not Always Correctly Compute Housing Assistance Payments
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Tulsa’s administration of its Section 8 program. We selected the Authority based on reports generated by the U.S.
May 17, 2017
Shelby County, TN, Administered Its Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Program Funds for Infrastructure in Accordance With HUD Requirements
We audited Shelby County’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) grant. We selected the County for review in accordance with our annual audit plan and because the County received more than $7.4 million in funding to recover from severe storms, tornadoes, straight-line winds, and flooding that occurred in April 2011. Our audit objective was to determine whether the County ensured that (1) funds were spent onl
January 17, 2017
The State of Oklahoma Did Not Obligate and Spend Its Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Funds in Accordance With Requirements
We audited the State of Oklahoma because it received $93.7 million in Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) allocations for presidentially declared disasters that occurred in 2011, 2012, and 2013. The substantial amount of CDBG-DR funding required a review of the State’s program. Our objective was to determine whether the State obligated and spent its grant in accordance with requirements.
September 30, 2016
Taliafaro, Inc., a Multifamily Housing Management Agent, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’ Requirements or Its Own Policies and Procedures in the Disbursement of Project Funds and Collection of Its Fees
We reviewed the disbursement of project funds for seven of the Sections 202 and 811 supportive housing projects for the elderly and persons with disabilities managed by Taliafaro, Inc. We initiated the audit under the U.S.
September 30, 2015
The City of Moore, OK, Generally Had the Capacity To Expend Its Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery Funds
We reviewed the City of Moore, OK, because it received $52.2 million in Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding in response to the tornado that struck Moore on May 20, 2013. Further, the City only recently became a CDBG entitlement grantee, and there was a substantial increase between its regular CDBG funding and its CDBG-DR funding. Also, our annual audit plan placed a priority on reviewing entities t
August 07, 2015
Peoples Home Equity, Inc., Brentwood, TN, Did Not Follow HUD Requirements in Approving FHA Loans and Implementing Its Quality Control Program
We audited Peoples Home Equity, Inc.(Peoples), a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) approved nonsupervised direct endorsement lender located in Brentwood, TN. We selected Peoples based on its high default rates. The audit was part of our annual audit plan to review single family programs and lenders. Our audit objectives were to determine whether Peoples complied with HUD requirements when it originated and underwrote FHA loans,
September 30, 2014
The Memphis Housing Authority, Memphis, TN, Did Not Always Ensure That Its Housing Choice Voucher Program Units Met HUD’s Housing Quality Standards
We audited the Memphis, TN, Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program as part of the activities in our fiscal year 2014 audit plan. We selected the Authority because it had a large program, receiving about $40 million in yearly funding, and was part of the OIG’s annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority’s inspection process adequately ensured that its units were in material compliance with hou
September 30, 2014