Audit 383137

Finding 2025-001 – Moving to Work Resident Files – Eligibility – Rent Calculations & HAP Disbursements Noncompliance & Material Weakness – ALN 14.881 Condition & Cause: We reviewed fifteen (15) HCV project-based resident files and twenty (20) HCV tenant-based resident files for a total of thirty-five (35) Moving to Work resident files reviewed. We noted fourteen (14) files with instances of noncompliance, all of which came from the tenant-based voucher sample. • Five (5) files contained miscalculations of income or HAP • Four (4) files lacked proper verification of income or deductions • Four (4) files lacked the Authorization for Release of information • Three (3) files were missing the appropriate lease • Three (3) files lacked the Annual Application for Continued Occupancy • Three (3) files lacked the EIV when an income review was conducted • One (1) file did not pass HQS inspection and the Agency continued paying HAP • One (1) file lacked the picture ID of the Head of Household We noted that the Agency struggled with hiring and staff turnover during the audit period, which likely contributed to the lapse in compliance adherence. As a mitigating factor, we note that the Agency is currently conducting a one-time internal review of 100% of tenant files. Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations, the Housing Authority’s Administrative Plan, Moving To Work Plan, and specific HUD guidelines in documenting and maintaining resident files. Effect: Missing verification and miscalculations of adjusted income or HAP increases the risk of improper subsidy payments and material misstatements of the financial statements. Failure to abate HAP in instances where the unit did not pass HQS inspections expose the Agency to financial liability. Incomplete documentation reduces the Agency’s ability to substantiate eligibility determinations. Ongoing noncompliance may also draw scrutiny from regulatory bodies, increasing the risk of financial penalties or loss of funding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Agency complete its current review of all participant files to identify and correct deficiencies. Additionally, we suggest that the Agency implement a routine quality control review process to effectively monitor compliance with local and federal regulations regarding the maintenance of tenant files. Questioned Costs: We performed an extrapolation of the housing assistance overpayment based on our reviewed sample of resident files. This resulted in likely questioned costs of $61,989, which reflects 1.34% of total HAP expense. Repeat Finding: Yes Was sampling statistically valid? Yes Views of responsible officials: The PHA agrees with the results of the audit and recommendations.