Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not get Board approval for several Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims. Criteria: Minnesota Statute ? 412.271, subd. 1 directs all claims be audited and allowed by the HRA Board. Meaning all claims paid by the HRA are required to be approved by the Board at the HRA?s monthly meetings. The HRA also relies on Board approval of expenditures as a key control over federal spending. We noted instances throughout the year where there were gaps in the check sequences that the HRA was approving, thereby not approving all claims. Cause: Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims were not included in monthly Board meetings for approval. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Minnesota legal compliance and there were not proper internal controls over federal expenditures. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings for approval. Management Response: The HRA?s management will include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not have depository agreements with the banks. Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations ? 982.156 requires depository agreements to be deposited with a financial institution selected as depositary by the PHA in accordance with HUD requirements. Cause: The HRA did not have all necessary forms for single audit compliance. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Federal Award Programs. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA management complete the necessary forms with the bank to ensure compliance. Management Response: The HRA?s management will complete the depository agreement forms with the bank.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not get Board approval for several Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims. Criteria: Minnesota Statute ? 412.271, subd. 1 directs all claims be audited and allowed by the HRA Board. Meaning all claims paid by the HRA are required to be approved by the Board at the HRA?s monthly meetings. The HRA also relies on Board approval of expenditures as a key control over federal spending. We noted instances throughout the year where there were gaps in the check sequences that the HRA was approving, thereby not approving all claims. Cause: Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims were not included in monthly Board meetings for approval. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Minnesota legal compliance and there were not proper internal controls over federal expenditures. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings for approval. Management Response: The HRA?s management will include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not have depository agreements with the banks. Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations ? 982.156 requires depository agreements to be deposited with a financial institution selected as depositary by the PHA in accordance with HUD requirements. Cause: The HRA did not have all necessary forms for single audit compliance. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Federal Award Programs. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA management complete the necessary forms with the bank to ensure compliance. Management Response: The HRA?s management will complete the depository agreement forms with the bank.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not get Board approval for several Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims. Criteria: Minnesota Statute ? 412.271, subd. 1 directs all claims be audited and allowed by the HRA Board. Meaning all claims paid by the HRA are required to be approved by the Board at the HRA?s monthly meetings. The HRA also relies on Board approval of expenditures as a key control over federal spending. We noted instances throughout the year where there were gaps in the check sequences that the HRA was approving, thereby not approving all claims. Cause: Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims were not included in monthly Board meetings for approval. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Minnesota legal compliance and there were not proper internal controls over federal expenditures. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings for approval. Management Response: The HRA?s management will include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not perform a re-inspection of a failed inspection. Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations ? 982.405 requires all failed inspections to be re-inspected. Cause: The HRA did not have adequate internal controls over inspections for single audit compliance. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Federal Award Programs. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA management have controls in place to ensure all failed inspections are re-inspected. Management Response: The HRA?s management will ensure all failed inspections are re-inspected in the future.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not perform a re-inspection of a failed inspection. Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations ? 982.405 requires all failed inspections to be re-inspected. Cause: The HRA did not have adequate internal controls over inspections for single audit compliance. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Federal Award Programs. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA management have controls in place to ensure all failed inspections are re-inspected. Management Response: The HRA?s management will ensure all failed inspections are re-inspected in the future.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not get Board approval for several Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims. Criteria: Minnesota Statute ? 412.271, subd. 1 directs all claims be audited and allowed by the HRA Board. Meaning all claims paid by the HRA are required to be approved by the Board at the HRA?s monthly meetings. The HRA also relies on Board approval of expenditures as a key control over federal spending. We noted instances throughout the year where there were gaps in the check sequences that the HRA was approving, thereby not approving all claims. Cause: Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims were not included in monthly Board meetings for approval. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Minnesota legal compliance and there were not proper internal controls over federal expenditures. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings for approval. Management Response: The HRA?s management will include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not have depository agreements with the banks. Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations ? 982.156 requires depository agreements to be deposited with a financial institution selected as depositary by the PHA in accordance with HUD requirements. Cause: The HRA did not have all necessary forms for single audit compliance. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Federal Award Programs. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA management complete the necessary forms with the bank to ensure compliance. Management Response: The HRA?s management will complete the depository agreement forms with the bank.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not get Board approval for several Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims. Criteria: Minnesota Statute ? 412.271, subd. 1 directs all claims be audited and allowed by the HRA Board. Meaning all claims paid by the HRA are required to be approved by the Board at the HRA?s monthly meetings. The HRA also relies on Board approval of expenditures as a key control over federal spending. We noted instances throughout the year where there were gaps in the check sequences that the HRA was approving, thereby not approving all claims. Cause: Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims were not included in monthly Board meetings for approval. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Minnesota legal compliance and there were not proper internal controls over federal expenditures. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings for approval. Management Response: The HRA?s management will include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not have depository agreements with the banks. Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations ? 982.156 requires depository agreements to be deposited with a financial institution selected as depositary by the PHA in accordance with HUD requirements. Cause: The HRA did not have all necessary forms for single audit compliance. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Federal Award Programs. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA management complete the necessary forms with the bank to ensure compliance. Management Response: The HRA?s management will complete the depository agreement forms with the bank.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not get Board approval for several Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims. Criteria: Minnesota Statute ? 412.271, subd. 1 directs all claims be audited and allowed by the HRA Board. Meaning all claims paid by the HRA are required to be approved by the Board at the HRA?s monthly meetings. The HRA also relies on Board approval of expenditures as a key control over federal spending. We noted instances throughout the year where there were gaps in the check sequences that the HRA was approving, thereby not approving all claims. Cause: Section 8 Housing Voucher and Public and Indian claims were not included in monthly Board meetings for approval. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Minnesota legal compliance and there were not proper internal controls over federal expenditures. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings for approval. Management Response: The HRA?s management will include all claims paid by the HRA in monthly Board meetings.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not perform a re-inspection of a failed inspection. Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations ? 982.405 requires all failed inspections to be re-inspected. Cause: The HRA did not have adequate internal controls over inspections for single audit compliance. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Federal Award Programs. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA management have controls in place to ensure all failed inspections are re-inspected. Management Response: The HRA?s management will ensure all failed inspections are re-inspected in the future.
Condition: During the audit we noted the HRA did not perform a re-inspection of a failed inspection. Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations ? 982.405 requires all failed inspections to be re-inspected. Cause: The HRA did not have adequate internal controls over inspections for single audit compliance. Effect: The HRA is not in compliance with Federal Award Programs. Recommendation: We recommend the HRA management have controls in place to ensure all failed inspections are re-inspected. Management Response: The HRA?s management will ensure all failed inspections are re-inspected in the future.