Recommendations

Open Recommendations by Oversight Area

Housing Assistance

Community Development

Disaster Recovery

Financial Risk and Accountability

Technology and Cybersecurity

Health and Safety

HUD's Operations

Priority Recommendations
Open Recommendations

View data table

Open Recommendations by Oversight Area
Oversight Area	Priority Recommendations	Open Recommendations
Housing Assistance	75	100
Community Development	3	75
Disaster Recovery	3	82
Financial Risk and Accountability	6	130
Technology and Cybersecurity	4	88
Health and Safety	1	53
HUD's Operations	4	100
Total	96	628

Filter search results using the following criteria

Rental Assistance

54 Results

Clear

We audited the Youngstown Metropolitan Housing Authority’s Housing Choice Voucher program based on the activities included in our 2016 annual audit plan and our analysis of risk factors related to the public housing agencies in Region 5’s jurisdiction. Our audit objective was to determine whether…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

Reconcile the $58,457 difference among its system report and subsidiary ledger and the information reported in HUD’s system ($1,944 in monthly escrow deposits $521 difference in monthly escrow deposits between HUD’s system and the amount reported in the Voucher Management system the average difference of $55,992 in total escrow account balances) to ensure that the monthly escrow deposits and total escrow balances are appropriately reported in HUD’s system and provide the supporting documentation to HUD.

Reconcile the current program participants and related information in its internal systems with the current participants listed in HUD’s systems.

Transfer $4,684 from its Housing Choice Voucher program account to its program account for the 12 participants with underfunded escrows.

Support or transfer $17,266 from its program account to its Housing Choice Voucher program for the 11 unsupported escrow calculations cited in this finding.

Transfer $7,574 from its program account to its Housing Choice Voucher program account for the five participants with overfunded escrows.

Support or reimburse its Housing Choice Voucher program $6,839 from non-Federal funds for the one unsupported interim disbursement and five unsupported graduation disbursements cited in this finding.

Reimburse its Housing Choice Voucher program $23,475 from non-Federal funds for the two ineligible interim and three ineligible graduation disbursements cited in this finding.

Reimburse two participants $7,076 from its Housing Choice Voucher program account for the underfunded graduation payments cited in this finding.

Ensure that it obtains a separate interest-bearing depository account for its program participants’ escrow funds in accordance with HUD’s requirements.

Ensure that its staff is appropriately trained and familiar with HUD’s requirements and its program action plan regarding the administration of its program to ensure that (1) participants’ contracts of participation and individual training and services plans are properly updated and contain the necessary signatures; (2) changes in participants’ files are properly identified and notated; and (3) participants are notified of changes in their monthly escrow deposits, total escrow balances, or both.

Develop and implement procedures and controls to ensure that (1) documentation required by HUD and its own action plan is correctly completed, documented, and updated; (2) escrow account balances are correctly calculated and disbursed; and (3) escrow accounts and disbursements are fully supported to ensure that $127,544 in coordinator grant funds is appropriately used over the next year.

Determine the amount of the $387,507 in coordinator grant funds that was appropriately earned by the Authority for meeting requirements. The funds that are determined to be unearned should be reimbursed to HUD from non-Federal funds.

Review the Authority’s graduate documentation and adjust the Authority’s minimum program size as necessary.

Review the Authority’s Section Eight Management Assessment Program scores for the Family Self-Sufficiency program and adjust as necessary.

Provide technical assistance and guidance to the Authority to ensure that it properly administers its Family Self-Sufficiency program.

Reimburse its program $34,666 from non-Federal funds ($21,990 $12,676 in administrative fees) for the overpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate calculations of housing assistance.

Reimburse the appropriate households $1,265 from program funds for the underpayment of housing assistance due to inappropriate calculations.

Pursue collection from the applicable households or reimburse its program $9,644 from non-Federal funds for the overpayment of housing assistance due to unreported or underreported income.

Support or reimburse its program $1,666 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported payments of housing assistance cited in this finding.

Implement adequate procedures and controls to ensure that (1) housing assistance payments are appropriately calculated and supported, (2) repayment agreements are created to recover overpaid housing assistance when unreported income is discovered during the examination process, and (3) annual reexaminations are completed in a timely manner to ensure that $322,550 in program funds is appropriately used for future payments.

We audited the Louisville Metro Housing Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program based on our risk assessment of all Kentucky public housing agencies and as part of the activities in our annual audit plan. Our audit objective was to determine whether the Authority administered its…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

Reimburse the program $70,992 ($63,312 $7,680) from non-Federal funds for housing assistance payments made and administrative fees received for the units that materially failed to meet HUD’s housing quality standards.

Certify, along with the owners of the 103 units cited in the finding, that the applicable housing quality standards violations have been corrected.

Develop and implement adequate policies and procedures for conducting quality control inspections in accordance with HUD’s requirements.

Develop and implement adequate procedures and controls to ensure that its quality control inspection program functions properly to include adequately monitoring the inspection contractor to prevent $20,566,345 in program funds from being spent over the next year on units that do not materially comply with requirements.

Reimburse the program $2,492 ($2,286 in housing assistance payments and $206 in administrative fees received) from non-Federal funds for rental subsidies not abated on four units.

Complete a review of rental subsidy abatements for all current units for which a retroactive abatement was not conducted. The Authority should reimburse the program from non-Federal funds for any overpaid rental subsidy.

Develop and implement written procedures and a process for retroactively abating housing assistance payments.

Complete a rent reasonableness determination for all current units for which a determination was required but not completed. The Authority should reimburse the program from non-Federal funds for any overpaid rental subsidy.

Develop and implement written procedures to ensure that a rent reasonableness determination is performed before rent increases are approved.

Complete a review that owners of current assisted units are not debarred, suspended, or subject to a limited denial of participation.

Develop and implement written procedures for conducting a complete owner eligibility determination.

Provide adequate training to its staff to ensure compliance with HUD’s requirements for program units.

We audited the Housing Choice Voucher and public housing programs at the West Warwick Housing Authority as a result of concerns from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and a hotline complaint. The audit objectives were to determine whether (1) procurements were executed in…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

Provide documentation to support that $2,063,351 was spent for reasonable and necessary costs. Any amount that cannot be supported should be repaid to the Housing Choice Voucher or public housing programs from non-Federal funds.

Reimburse the Housing Choice Voucher and public housing programs $2,752 from non-Federal sources for improper conflict-of-interest purchases.

Deobligate $6,100 from the asbestos abatement procurement and redistribute the funds to the public housing programs for eligible purposes.

Develop and implement procurement policies and procedures that comply with Federal, State, and local laws.

Develop and implement controls to ensure that contracts are in place when applicable.

Develop and enforce written conflict-of-interest requirements in compliance with Federal rules and regulations.

Develop and maintain a contract management system, including a contract register for all procurements.

Evaluate the training of West Warwick’s board of commissioners and determine whether additional training is required or other changes are appropriate.

.Develop and implement written policies and procedures to ensure that each Housing Choice Voucher program tenant file has an appropriately documented rent reasonableness determination.

Develop and implement written policies and procedures to ensure that each public housing unit has an annual inspection, which is appropriately documented in the tenant file.

Determine whether tenants were underpaid for utility allowances and if so, reimburse the tenants from non-Federal funds.

Evaluate the training of West Warwick employees and determine what additional training is necessary..

Provide documentation to support that $18,501 in credit card charges was spent for reasonable and necessary costs. Any amount that cannot be supported should be repaid from non-Federal funds and returned to the Housing Choice Voucher and public housing programs.

Provide documentation to support that $4,530 in petty cash funds was spent for reasonable and necessary costs. Any amount that cannot be supported should be repaid from non-Federal funds and returned to the Housing Choice Voucher and public housing programs.

Develop and maintain property records and conduct an inventory in accordance with Federal regulations.

We audited the New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority’s (Authority) administration of its Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) and Housing Choice Voucher Family Self-Sufficiency grant programs as part of the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) strategic plan goals to improve the…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

We recommend that the Director, Office of Public Housing, New York, instruct the Authority to reimburse from non-Federal funds the $219,715 expended for ineligible costs as follows; $215,402 to HUD, and $4,313 to the 2007 ROSS Family grant.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) audited the Indianapolis Housing Agency's (Agency) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program (program). The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2007 annual audit plan. We selected the Agency based upon our analysis of risk…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Cleveland Office of Public Housing require the Agency to determine the appropriate administrative fees for the applicable households for which it is unable to provide supporting documentation cited in recommendation 2D and reimburse its program the applicable amount from nonfederal funds.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audited the Saginaw Housing Commission’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2012 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to provide supporting documentation or reimburse its program $17,008 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported payments cited in this finding.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Inspector General audited the Saginaw Housing Commission’s Public Housing program. The audit was part of the activities in our fiscal year 2011 annual audit plan. We selected the Commission based upon our previous audit report on…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its Capital Fund $1,539,629 from non-Federal funds for the ineligible payments cited in this finding.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to return the $411,228 in excess capital fund draws cited in this finding.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to provide supporting documentation or reimburse its Capital Fund $394,683 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported costs cited in this finding.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its Capital Fund $13,085 from non-Federal funds for the inappropriately earned interest cited in this finding.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its appropriate programs $180,649 from non-Federal funds for the ineligible payments cited in this finding.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to provide supporting documentation or reimburse its appropriate programs $30,236 from non-Federal funds for the unsupported costs cited in this finding.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its Capital Fund $127,050 from non-Federal funds for the ineligible payments cited in this finding.

We recommend that the Director of HUD’s Detroit Office of Public Housing require the Commission to reimburse its operating fund $107,692 from non-Federal funds for ineligible payments cited in this finding.

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…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

Update its administrative plan to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Minimally, the administrative plan should clearly define the weights and rankings of the preference system and ensure that the residency preference complies with regulations.

Reevaluate the cases of the 131 applicants to whom it did not award residency points and award points as appropriate.

Update its waiting list as needed after completing corrective action for recommendation 1B.

Develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that it administers its waiting list according to the requirements in its administrative plan, including maintaining documentation to show that it properly selected applicants from the waiting list.

Develop and implement procedures for performing quarterly interim recertifications for families reporting zero income.

Develop and implement controls to ensure that it follows the procedures it develops and implements to resolve recommendation 1E.

Provide documentation to show that the family that received the benefit of the $2,463 overpayment in housing assistance reimbursed the program or repay its program from non-Federal funds for any amount not reimbursed by the family.

Provide technical assistance to the Authority to ensure that it properly manages its waiting list, properly uses its preference point system, and selects applicants in accordance with applicable requirements.

We audited the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority’s use of public housing operating and capital funds because (1) we received a hotline complaint alleging that the Authority mismanaged its procurement activities and improperly awarded an internet services contract for more than…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

Provide documentation to show that it purchased products and services totaling $728,516 at fair and reasonable prices or reimburse either its Operating or Capital Fund from non-Federal funds for any amounts that it cannot support.

Provide documentation to show that it had contracts for dumpster rentals and pest control services, and if it cannot provide the contracts, re-procure these services.

Obtain written agreements with the originating public bodies for its ongoing awards that were procured through intergovernmental agreements, including dumpster rentals, maintenance supplies, and consulting services, and if it cannot provide the agreements, re-procure these services.

Develop and implement controls to ensure that it complies with all applicable procurement requirements.

Provide technical assistance to the Authority to ensure that it understands Federal procurement requirements, including the proper use of intergovernmental agreements.

We audited PK Management, LLC, based on (1) media coverage of problems associated with Essex Village, an apartment complex in Virginia that it managed, and (2) issues identified in our prior audit of PK Management in Birmingham, AL. Our audit objective was to determine whether PK Management…

Oversight Area: Rental Assistance

Provide documentation to support housing assistance payments the projects received totaling $497,762 or reimburse HUD from nonproject funds for any amount that it cannot support.

Implement controls to ensure that it maintains adequate documentation in the tenant files to show that tenants were eligible for assistance and that the housing assistance payments were supported.

Open Recommendations by Oversight Area

Oversight Area

Status

Priority

The Youngstown Metropolitan Housing Authority, Youngstown, OH, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements Regarding the Administration of Its Housing Choice Voucher Program

The Louisville Metro Housing Authority, Louisville, KY, Did Not Comply With HUD’s and Its Own Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program Requirements

The West Warwick Housing Authority, West Warwick, RI, Needs To Improve Its Compliance With Federal Regulations for Its Housing Choice Voucher and Public Housing Programs

New Rochelle Municipal Housing Authority, New Rochelle, NY, Had Weaknesses in Its Self-Sufficiency Grant Programs

The Indianapolis Housing Agency, Indianapolis, Indiana, Did Not Effectively Operate Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program

The Saginaw Housing Commission, Saginaw, MI, Did Not Always Administer Its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program in Accordance With HUD’s and Its Own Requirements

The Saginaw Housing Commission, Saginaw, MI, Did Not Fully Implement Prior Audit Recommendations and Continued To Use Its Public Housing Program Funds for Ineligible Purposes

The Housing Authority of the City of Easton, PA, Did Not Always Properly Administer Its Housing Choice Voucher Program

The Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority, Charlottesville, VA, Did Not Always Comply With Applicable Procurement Requirements

PK Management, LLC, Richmond Heights, OH, Did Not Always Maintain Documentation Required to Support Housing Assistance Payments

Stay Informed