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 Hartford Housing Authority's Plan To Replace Boilers Did Not Meet Recovery Act and Federal Efficiency Requirements

We audited the Hartford Housing Authority (Authority) because it was awarded a $5 million Public Housing Capital Fund grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) and obligated the majority of the grant just before the required obligation deadline.

State of Connecticut Department of Social Services' Section 8 Housing Units Did Not Always Meet HUD's Housing Quality Standards

We audited the State of Connecticut Department of Social Services’ (agency) administration of its housing quality standards program for its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (Voucher program) as part of our fiscal year 2009 audit plan. The agency was selected based upon our analysis of risk factors relating to rental housing authorities in Region 1.

The Housing Authority of the City of Pueblo, CO, Generally Followed Recovery Act Rules and Regulations When Obligating and Expending its Recovery Act Capital Funds, But Did Not Accurately Report Recovery Act Funded Jobs

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General, reviewed the Housing Authority of the City of Pueblo, CO (Authority), based on out risk assessment considering the amount of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) capital funds it received and expended along with other evaluative factors.

The Compton Housing Authority, Compton, CA, Was Not Fully Reimbursed for Housing Assistance Payments for Portability Tenants

We audited the Compton Housing Authority’s (Authority) Section 8 program as the result of the Los Angeles Office of Public Housing’s concerns regarding its program administration. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority used Section 8 program funds in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. The Authority did not use Section 8 program funds in accordance with HUD rules and regulations as it did not fully comply with portability procedures and responsibilities. It was not fully reimbursed for housing assistance payments made for its portability tenants.

The Housing Authority of the City and County of San Francisco, CA, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Housing Choice Voucher Housing Quality Standards Inspections

We audited the Housing Authority of the City and County of San Francisco’s (Authority) Section 8 housing quality standards inspections of Housing Choice Voucher program (voucher)-funded housing units. Our objective was to determine whether the Authority conducted its housing quality standards inspections in accordance with HUD rules and regulations. We found that the Authority did not conduct its housing quality standards inspections of voucher-funded housing units in accordance with HUD rules and regulations.

HUD Should Provide Additional Monitoring of the Navajo Housing Authority's Implementation of Recovery Act-Funded Projects

We conducted a capacity review of the Navajo Housing Authority’s (Authority) operations. The objective of the review was to evaluate the Authority’s capacity to administer its American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) funds and identify related potential internal control weaknesses that could impact its ability to properly administer the funds. We did not find evidence indicating that the Authority lacked the basic capacity to administer its Recovery Act funding.

Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, Anchorage, AK, Needs To Improve Its Quality Control Plan

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General audited the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program of the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). We wanted to determine whether AHFC admitted and housed tenants properly, calculated tenant rents correctly, and maintained an effective quality control program. We also wanted to determine whether AHFC properly administered its HUD Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing program (VASH).

Evaluation of the Final Front-End Risk Assessment for the Native American Housing Block Grant Program

We reviewed the Office of Native American Programs' (ONAP) Front-End Risk Assessment (FERA) for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) funding for Native American Block Grant housing programs as part of our annual audit plan. Our objective was to determine whether the FERA complied with the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) guidance for implementation of the Recovery Act, the Recovery Act's streamlined FERA process, and U.S.

Review Results for Hotline Case Number HL-09-0756 Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians, Pipe Spring, AZ

In response to an April 3, 2009, hotline request from the Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians, Pipe Spring, AZ (Kaibab), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Inspector General reviewed HUD’s evaluation of Kaibab’s application for an Indian Community Development Block Grant (Indian Block Grant) under HUD’s 2008 notice of funding availability.

HUD Needs to Ensure That the Housing Authority of New Orleans Strengthens Its Capacity to Adequately Administer Recovery Funding

As part of the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Inspector General's obligation to ensure accountability and transparency in use of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) funds, we performed a review to assess the Housing Authority of New Orleans' (Authority) capacity to administer $34.5 million in ARRA funding. Our objective was to evaluate the Authority's capacity and risks in the following areas: basic internal controls, financial operations, procurement, and outputs/outcomes.