U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government Here’s how you know

The .gov means it’s official.

Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure.

The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

The City of Saginaw, MI, Needs To Improve Its Capacity To Effectively and Efficiently Administer Its Community Development Block Grant Program Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Inspector General reviewed the City of Saginaw’s (City) Community Development Block Grant (Block Grant) program under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Act). The review was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2010 annual audit plan. We selected the City based upon the results of our prior audit of the City’s Block Grant-funded demolition activities.

Wayne County, MI, Needs To Improve Its Capacity to Effectively and Efficiently Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General reviewed Wayne County’s (County) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). The review was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2009 annual audit plan. We selected the County based upon a request from HUD’s Detroit Office of Community Planning and Development. Our objective was to determine whether the County had the capacity to effectively and efficiently administer its Neighborhood Stabilization Program.

The City of Saginaw, Michigan, Lacked Adequate Controls over Its Community Development Block Grant-Funded Demolition Activities

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the City of Saginaw’s (City) Community Development Block Grant (Block Grant) program-funded demolition activities. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2009 annual audit plan. We selected the City based upon a request from HUD’s Detroit Office of Community Planning and Development.

The State of Maine’s Department of Economic and Community Development, Office of Community Development, Has Sufficient Capacity To Effectively Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program

In accordance with our goal to review and ensure the proper administration of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds provided under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA) and/or the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), we conducted a capacity review of the operations of the State of Maine’s (State) Department of Economic and Community Development, Office of Community Development (Department). The Department has responsibility for administering the State’s NSP.

The Louisville/Jefferson County Metropolitan Government Needs To Strengthen Controls Over Reporting for Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program

HUD OIG reviewed the Louisville/Jefferson County Metropolitan Government’s (Louisville Metro) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (program). We selected Louisville Metro for review based on its low percentage of obligations and the approaching September 20, 2010, deadline for obligating funds. Our objective was to evaluate Louisville Metro’s use of program funding, including the propriety of its activities, obligations, expenditures, and reports to the U.S.

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.

The State of Indiana’s Administrator Awarded Neighborhood Stabilization Program Funds for an Inappropriate Project

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General reviewed the State of Indiana’s (State) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). The review was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2010 annual audit plan. We selected the State based upon a citizen’s complaint to our office. Our objective was to determine whether the State awarded Program funds to eligible projects.

The City of East St. Louis Did Not Properly Allocate Salary and Building Expenses or Properly Document Its Process to Secure a Consulting Services Contract

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the City of East St. Louis, Illinois’ (City) Community Development Block Grant (Block Grant) program. Our objectives were to determine whether the City properly expended Block Grant funds for salaries and building expenses and followed proper procurement processes while awarding significant administration contracts. The City did not properly allocate salary and building expenses to the Block Grant program.

The State of Illinois Needs To Improve Its Capacity To Effectively and Efficiently Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the State of Illinois’ (State) Neighborhood Stabilization Program (Program). The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2010 annual audit plan. We selected the State based upon citizens’ complaints to our office.

The City of East St. Louis Awarded Block Grant Program Funds to Recipients Without Adequately Verifying Their Eligibility

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General audited the City of East St. Louis, Illinois’ (City) Community Development Block Grant (Block Grant) program. Our objective was to determine whether the City properly verified the eligibility of Block Grant-funded housing rehabilitation recipients. We found that the City awarded Block Grant funds to 143 recipients without adequately verifying their eligibility to receive housing rehabilitation assistance.