Finding 2024-001 – Housing Choice Voucher Tenant Files – Eligibility – Noncompliance & Significant Deficiency – Housing Choice Voucher Program – ALN #14.871
Condition & Cause:
We reviewed ten (10) tenant files from the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program and found three (3) files, or 30% of our sample, to be noncompliant. We noted two (2) files did not contain an Enterprise Income Verification (EIV) report that should have been pulled during reexamination, and one (1) file was missing a signed Declaration of Section 214 Status.
We believe these instances of noncompliance may be linked to the ongoing staff turnover in recent years. During the audit period, the Agency had three different Executive Directors and three different HCV Specialists.
Criteria:
The Code of Federal Regulations, the Housing Authority Administrative Plan and specific HUD guidelines in documenting and maintaining Housing Choice Voucher tenant files.
Effect:
Failure to maintain a Declaration of Status 214 or to use the EIV system in its entirety can result in errors in subsidy calculation or eligibility determination, as well as compromise the program’s compliance with regulatory requirements.
Recommendation:
We recommend that the Agency conduct a thorough tenant file audit of existing tenants to determine whether there are any additional misstatements. The Agency should determine the best way to monitor compliance with local and federal regulations as it pertains to tenant documentation and adjust internal procedures immediately.
Questioned Costs: None
Repeat Finding: Yes
Was sampling statistically valid? Yes
Finding 2024-002 – Low Income Public Housing Tenant Files – Eligibility – Noncompliance & Material Weakness – Public and Indian Housing – ALN #14.850
Condition & Cause:
We reviewed ten (10) tenant files from the Public Housing program and found that five (5) files, or 50% of our sample, were noncompliant. Specifically, all five (5) files were missing the Enterprise Income Verification (EIV) report that should have been pulled during reexamination. Additionally, three (3) of these files were missing proper verification of either annual income or deductions from annual income.
We believe these instances of noncompliance may be linked to the ongoing staff turnover in recent years. During the audit period, the Agency had three different Executive Directors and three different Public Housing Specialists.
Criteria:
The Code of Federal regulations, the Housing Authority Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy and specific HUD guidelines in documenting and maintaining Low Income Public Housing tenant files.
Effect:
Failure to properly verify adjusted annual income can lead to inaccurate subsidy calculations and misstatements of the Authority’s financial statements. Furthermore, the program could be at risk for noncompliance with regulatory requirements.
Recommendation:
We recommend that the Agency conduct a thorough tenant file audit of existing tenants to determine whether there are any additional misstatements. The Agency should determine the best way to monitor compliance with local and federal regulations as it pertains to tenant verification and adjust internal procedures immediately.
Questioned Costs: None
Repeat Finding: Yes
Was sampling statistically valid? Yes
Finding 2024-003 – Housing Choice Voucher Waiting List – Special Tests and Provisions – Noncompliance & Material Weakness – Housing Choice Voucher Program – ALN #14.871
Condition & Cause:
We reviewed admissions to the Housing Choice Voucher program during the audit period and requested documentation for two (2) tenants selected from the waiting list for further review. The Authority was unable to produce readily available documentation. This may be linked to the ongoing staff turnover in recent years. During the audit period, the Agency had three different Executive Directors and three different HCV Specialists.
Criteria:
The Code of Federal Regulations and the Housing Authority’s Administrative Plan.
Effect:
The absence of a proper audit trail for the waiting list could raise concerns about transparency, fairness, and compliance with federal requirements.
Recommendation:
We recommend that the Agency implement a standardized procedure for maintaining complete and accurate documentation for the ranking, selection, and removal of applicants from the Housing Choice Voucher waiting list.
Questioned Costs: None
Repeat Finding: No
Was sampling statistically valid? Yes
Finding 2024-004 – Public Housing Waiting Lists – Special Tests and Provisions – Noncompliance & Material Weakness – Public and Indian Housing – ALN #14.850
Condition & Cause:
We selected three (3) tenants admitted into the Public Housing program during the audit period for review. We found that for two (2) of these tenants, the local preferences used to determine their position on the waiting list were not verified. This could be linked to the ongoing staff turnover in recent years. During the audit period, the Agency had three different Executive Directors and three different Public Housing Specialists.
For the remaining tenant, the Authority was unable to produce readily available documentation for review. Upon further investigation, we found the tenant in question is an immediate family member of a staff member and was allegedly admitted into the program based on this conflict of interest. We have included the subsidized portion of this tenant’s rent during the fiscal year as questioned costs.
Criteria:
The Code of Federal Regulations and the Housing Authority’s Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy.
Effect:
Failure to verify claimed preferences could result in applicants being housed out of order. The absence of a proper audit trail for the waiting list could raise concerns about transparency, fairness, and compliance with federal requirements. Bypassing admission controls compromises the integrity of the program and puts the Agency at risk for scrutiny from regulatory bodies.
Recommendation:
We recommend that the Agency implement a standardized procedure for maintaining complete and accurate documentation for the ranking, selection, and removal of applicants from the Public Housing waiting list.
Questioned Costs: $1,326
Repeat Finding: No
Was sampling statistically valid? Yes
Finding 2024-001 – Housing Choice Voucher Tenant Files – Eligibility – Noncompliance & Significant Deficiency – Housing Choice Voucher Program – ALN #14.871
Condition & Cause:
We reviewed ten (10) tenant files from the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program and found three (3) files, or 30% of our sample, to be noncompliant. We noted two (2) files did not contain an Enterprise Income Verification (EIV) report that should have been pulled during reexamination, and one (1) file was missing a signed Declaration of Section 214 Status.
We believe these instances of noncompliance may be linked to the ongoing staff turnover in recent years. During the audit period, the Agency had three different Executive Directors and three different HCV Specialists.
Criteria:
The Code of Federal Regulations, the Housing Authority Administrative Plan and specific HUD guidelines in documenting and maintaining Housing Choice Voucher tenant files.
Effect:
Failure to maintain a Declaration of Status 214 or to use the EIV system in its entirety can result in errors in subsidy calculation or eligibility determination, as well as compromise the program’s compliance with regulatory requirements.
Recommendation:
We recommend that the Agency conduct a thorough tenant file audit of existing tenants to determine whether there are any additional misstatements. The Agency should determine the best way to monitor compliance with local and federal regulations as it pertains to tenant documentation and adjust internal procedures immediately.
Questioned Costs: None
Repeat Finding: Yes
Was sampling statistically valid? Yes
Finding 2024-002 – Low Income Public Housing Tenant Files – Eligibility – Noncompliance & Material Weakness – Public and Indian Housing – ALN #14.850
Condition & Cause:
We reviewed ten (10) tenant files from the Public Housing program and found that five (5) files, or 50% of our sample, were noncompliant. Specifically, all five (5) files were missing the Enterprise Income Verification (EIV) report that should have been pulled during reexamination. Additionally, three (3) of these files were missing proper verification of either annual income or deductions from annual income.
We believe these instances of noncompliance may be linked to the ongoing staff turnover in recent years. During the audit period, the Agency had three different Executive Directors and three different Public Housing Specialists.
Criteria:
The Code of Federal regulations, the Housing Authority Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy and specific HUD guidelines in documenting and maintaining Low Income Public Housing tenant files.
Effect:
Failure to properly verify adjusted annual income can lead to inaccurate subsidy calculations and misstatements of the Authority’s financial statements. Furthermore, the program could be at risk for noncompliance with regulatory requirements.
Recommendation:
We recommend that the Agency conduct a thorough tenant file audit of existing tenants to determine whether there are any additional misstatements. The Agency should determine the best way to monitor compliance with local and federal regulations as it pertains to tenant verification and adjust internal procedures immediately.
Questioned Costs: None
Repeat Finding: Yes
Was sampling statistically valid? Yes
Finding 2024-003 – Housing Choice Voucher Waiting List – Special Tests and Provisions – Noncompliance & Material Weakness – Housing Choice Voucher Program – ALN #14.871
Condition & Cause:
We reviewed admissions to the Housing Choice Voucher program during the audit period and requested documentation for two (2) tenants selected from the waiting list for further review. The Authority was unable to produce readily available documentation. This may be linked to the ongoing staff turnover in recent years. During the audit period, the Agency had three different Executive Directors and three different HCV Specialists.
Criteria:
The Code of Federal Regulations and the Housing Authority’s Administrative Plan.
Effect:
The absence of a proper audit trail for the waiting list could raise concerns about transparency, fairness, and compliance with federal requirements.
Recommendation:
We recommend that the Agency implement a standardized procedure for maintaining complete and accurate documentation for the ranking, selection, and removal of applicants from the Housing Choice Voucher waiting list.
Questioned Costs: None
Repeat Finding: No
Was sampling statistically valid? Yes
Finding 2024-004 – Public Housing Waiting Lists – Special Tests and Provisions – Noncompliance & Material Weakness – Public and Indian Housing – ALN #14.850
Condition & Cause:
We selected three (3) tenants admitted into the Public Housing program during the audit period for review. We found that for two (2) of these tenants, the local preferences used to determine their position on the waiting list were not verified. This could be linked to the ongoing staff turnover in recent years. During the audit period, the Agency had three different Executive Directors and three different Public Housing Specialists.
For the remaining tenant, the Authority was unable to produce readily available documentation for review. Upon further investigation, we found the tenant in question is an immediate family member of a staff member and was allegedly admitted into the program based on this conflict of interest. We have included the subsidized portion of this tenant’s rent during the fiscal year as questioned costs.
Criteria:
The Code of Federal Regulations and the Housing Authority’s Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy.
Effect:
Failure to verify claimed preferences could result in applicants being housed out of order. The absence of a proper audit trail for the waiting list could raise concerns about transparency, fairness, and compliance with federal requirements. Bypassing admission controls compromises the integrity of the program and puts the Agency at risk for scrutiny from regulatory bodies.
Recommendation:
We recommend that the Agency implement a standardized procedure for maintaining complete and accurate documentation for the ranking, selection, and removal of applicants from the Public Housing waiting list.
Questioned Costs: $1,326
Repeat Finding: No
Was sampling statistically valid? Yes