Audit 70550

FY End
2022-06-30
Total Expended
$2.21M
Findings
8
Programs
5
Year: 2022 Accepted: 2023-03-02

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
63668 2022-001 Material Weakness Yes E
63669 2022-002 Material Weakness Yes N
63670 2022-001 Material Weakness Yes E
63671 2022-002 Material Weakness Yes N
640110 2022-001 Material Weakness Yes E
640111 2022-002 Material Weakness Yes N
640112 2022-001 Material Weakness Yes E
640113 2022-002 Material Weakness Yes N

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
14.871 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers $1.51M Yes 2
14.850 Public and Indian Housing $433,297 - 0
14.872 Public Housing Capital Fund $190,667 - 0
14.871 Covid-19 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers $53,947 Yes 2
14.850 Covid-19 Public and Indian Housing $16,634 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
PP8RPZ5F2X14 Jennifer Hammond Auditee
8036847359 Sergio Gonzalez Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Accounting Policies: This schedule includes the federal grant activity of the Housing Authority of the City of York and is presentedon the full accrual basis of accounting. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with therequirements of the Uniform Guidance (Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200, UniformAdministrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards). Therefore, someamounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation ofthe basic financial statements. The authority has not elected to use the 10% deminimis cost rate. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The auditee did not use the de minimis cost rate.

Finding Details

2022-001 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Program: U.S. Department of HUD: Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (CFDA 14.871) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance This is a repeat finding of 2021-001 from June 30, 2021 Statement of Condition Out of a total tenant population of approximately 200 vouchers, 20 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated incorrectly and reported incorrectly on the 50058 form. The HAP rent amount did not change. ? 1 file where the tenant?s wage income was calculated using only one paystub even though the tenant provided two. This changes the tenant?s HAP rent from $592 to $579. ? 1 file where the $360 for food stamps was included in the tenant?s income and should have been excluded. This changes the HAP rent from $466 to $475. ? 1 file where there was no support for a full-time student deduction for one member of the household. The HAP rent amount did not change. ? 1 file that did not contain a signed lease agreement and HAP contract for the current landlord and unit address. In addition to the above, during our new admissions testing (3 tested out of 22 new admissions) we noted the following: ? 1 error where the request for tenancy form was signed three days after voucher expiration with no proof of extension in the file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was signed by the owner more than 11 months after the move-in date. Criteria 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as complete and accurate tenant files. In addition, the Authority?s administrative plan also requires following proper procedures for determination of HAP and documentation in the tenant files. Questioned Costs: None. Effect The Authority is not in compliance with all of the HUD requirements regarding eligibility and tenant recertification, which could result in incorrect total tenant payments for rent and HAP payments to landlords. Cause Procedures to ensure compliance with all of the HUD requirements were not being carefully followed. Recommendation The Authority should correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and utilize an ongoing quality control review process on the entire tenant population to ensure proper compliance with the requirements related to tenant eligibility. Ongoing staff training and timely management reviews should be utilized to ensure staff is aware of acceptable procedures. In addition, the Authority should review staffing levels, skill sets and case load. Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee We concur with the recommendation and have implemented various controls. A tenant file and unit quality control procedure has been developed and implemented. See corrective action plan.
2022-002 Special Tests and Provisions ? Income Targeting Program: U.S. Department of HUD: Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (CFDA 14.871) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance This is a repeat finding of 2021-002 from June 30, 2021 Statement of Condition The Authority did not have adequate controls over income targeting to assure that the Authority is in compliance with this requirement. During our testing, we noted that tenants with incomes that were extremely low accounted for approximately 59% of new admissions during the fiscal year, which is below the minimum required percentage of 75%. Criteria During each fiscal year, at least 75% of the Authority?s new admissions in the Housing Choice Voucher Program must have incomes that do no exceed 30% of the area median income (?extremely low?) as published by HUD. Questioned Costs None. Effect The Authority does not appear to be in compliance with Section 8 income targeting requirements. Cause The Authority did not have sufficient internal controls in place to track income targeting. Recommendation We recommend the Authority assure that at least 75% of new admissions be in the extremely low-income bracket. This should be monitored throughout the year. The Authority can also select applicants on the waiting list who are extremely low income by bypassing others on the list that don?t meet the requirement and documenting that the person was selected ahead of others to be able to meet the requirement. 2022-002 Special Tests and Provisions ? Income Targeting (Continued) Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee: We concur with the recommendation. We will closely monitor new admissions and focus on applicants on the waiting list who meet the criteria as extremely low income so that the 75% requirement is met.
2022-001 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Program: U.S. Department of HUD: Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (CFDA 14.871) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance This is a repeat finding of 2021-001 from June 30, 2021 Statement of Condition Out of a total tenant population of approximately 200 vouchers, 20 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated incorrectly and reported incorrectly on the 50058 form. The HAP rent amount did not change. ? 1 file where the tenant?s wage income was calculated using only one paystub even though the tenant provided two. This changes the tenant?s HAP rent from $592 to $579. ? 1 file where the $360 for food stamps was included in the tenant?s income and should have been excluded. This changes the HAP rent from $466 to $475. ? 1 file where there was no support for a full-time student deduction for one member of the household. The HAP rent amount did not change. ? 1 file that did not contain a signed lease agreement and HAP contract for the current landlord and unit address. In addition to the above, during our new admissions testing (3 tested out of 22 new admissions) we noted the following: ? 1 error where the request for tenancy form was signed three days after voucher expiration with no proof of extension in the file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was signed by the owner more than 11 months after the move-in date. Criteria 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as complete and accurate tenant files. In addition, the Authority?s administrative plan also requires following proper procedures for determination of HAP and documentation in the tenant files. Questioned Costs: None. Effect The Authority is not in compliance with all of the HUD requirements regarding eligibility and tenant recertification, which could result in incorrect total tenant payments for rent and HAP payments to landlords. Cause Procedures to ensure compliance with all of the HUD requirements were not being carefully followed. Recommendation The Authority should correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and utilize an ongoing quality control review process on the entire tenant population to ensure proper compliance with the requirements related to tenant eligibility. Ongoing staff training and timely management reviews should be utilized to ensure staff is aware of acceptable procedures. In addition, the Authority should review staffing levels, skill sets and case load. Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee We concur with the recommendation and have implemented various controls. A tenant file and unit quality control procedure has been developed and implemented. See corrective action plan.
2022-002 Special Tests and Provisions ? Income Targeting Program: U.S. Department of HUD: Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (CFDA 14.871) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance This is a repeat finding of 2021-002 from June 30, 2021 Statement of Condition The Authority did not have adequate controls over income targeting to assure that the Authority is in compliance with this requirement. During our testing, we noted that tenants with incomes that were extremely low accounted for approximately 59% of new admissions during the fiscal year, which is below the minimum required percentage of 75%. Criteria During each fiscal year, at least 75% of the Authority?s new admissions in the Housing Choice Voucher Program must have incomes that do no exceed 30% of the area median income (?extremely low?) as published by HUD. Questioned Costs None. Effect The Authority does not appear to be in compliance with Section 8 income targeting requirements. Cause The Authority did not have sufficient internal controls in place to track income targeting. Recommendation We recommend the Authority assure that at least 75% of new admissions be in the extremely low-income bracket. This should be monitored throughout the year. The Authority can also select applicants on the waiting list who are extremely low income by bypassing others on the list that don?t meet the requirement and documenting that the person was selected ahead of others to be able to meet the requirement. 2022-002 Special Tests and Provisions ? Income Targeting (Continued) Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee: We concur with the recommendation. We will closely monitor new admissions and focus on applicants on the waiting list who meet the criteria as extremely low income so that the 75% requirement is met.
2022-001 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Program: U.S. Department of HUD: Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (CFDA 14.871) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance This is a repeat finding of 2021-001 from June 30, 2021 Statement of Condition Out of a total tenant population of approximately 200 vouchers, 20 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated incorrectly and reported incorrectly on the 50058 form. The HAP rent amount did not change. ? 1 file where the tenant?s wage income was calculated using only one paystub even though the tenant provided two. This changes the tenant?s HAP rent from $592 to $579. ? 1 file where the $360 for food stamps was included in the tenant?s income and should have been excluded. This changes the HAP rent from $466 to $475. ? 1 file where there was no support for a full-time student deduction for one member of the household. The HAP rent amount did not change. ? 1 file that did not contain a signed lease agreement and HAP contract for the current landlord and unit address. In addition to the above, during our new admissions testing (3 tested out of 22 new admissions) we noted the following: ? 1 error where the request for tenancy form was signed three days after voucher expiration with no proof of extension in the file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was signed by the owner more than 11 months after the move-in date. Criteria 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as complete and accurate tenant files. In addition, the Authority?s administrative plan also requires following proper procedures for determination of HAP and documentation in the tenant files. Questioned Costs: None. Effect The Authority is not in compliance with all of the HUD requirements regarding eligibility and tenant recertification, which could result in incorrect total tenant payments for rent and HAP payments to landlords. Cause Procedures to ensure compliance with all of the HUD requirements were not being carefully followed. Recommendation The Authority should correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and utilize an ongoing quality control review process on the entire tenant population to ensure proper compliance with the requirements related to tenant eligibility. Ongoing staff training and timely management reviews should be utilized to ensure staff is aware of acceptable procedures. In addition, the Authority should review staffing levels, skill sets and case load. Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee We concur with the recommendation and have implemented various controls. A tenant file and unit quality control procedure has been developed and implemented. See corrective action plan.
2022-002 Special Tests and Provisions ? Income Targeting Program: U.S. Department of HUD: Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (CFDA 14.871) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance This is a repeat finding of 2021-002 from June 30, 2021 Statement of Condition The Authority did not have adequate controls over income targeting to assure that the Authority is in compliance with this requirement. During our testing, we noted that tenants with incomes that were extremely low accounted for approximately 59% of new admissions during the fiscal year, which is below the minimum required percentage of 75%. Criteria During each fiscal year, at least 75% of the Authority?s new admissions in the Housing Choice Voucher Program must have incomes that do no exceed 30% of the area median income (?extremely low?) as published by HUD. Questioned Costs None. Effect The Authority does not appear to be in compliance with Section 8 income targeting requirements. Cause The Authority did not have sufficient internal controls in place to track income targeting. Recommendation We recommend the Authority assure that at least 75% of new admissions be in the extremely low-income bracket. This should be monitored throughout the year. The Authority can also select applicants on the waiting list who are extremely low income by bypassing others on the list that don?t meet the requirement and documenting that the person was selected ahead of others to be able to meet the requirement. 2022-002 Special Tests and Provisions ? Income Targeting (Continued) Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee: We concur with the recommendation. We will closely monitor new admissions and focus on applicants on the waiting list who meet the criteria as extremely low income so that the 75% requirement is met.
2022-001 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Program: U.S. Department of HUD: Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (CFDA 14.871) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance This is a repeat finding of 2021-001 from June 30, 2021 Statement of Condition Out of a total tenant population of approximately 200 vouchers, 20 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated incorrectly and reported incorrectly on the 50058 form. The HAP rent amount did not change. ? 1 file where the tenant?s wage income was calculated using only one paystub even though the tenant provided two. This changes the tenant?s HAP rent from $592 to $579. ? 1 file where the $360 for food stamps was included in the tenant?s income and should have been excluded. This changes the HAP rent from $466 to $475. ? 1 file where there was no support for a full-time student deduction for one member of the household. The HAP rent amount did not change. ? 1 file that did not contain a signed lease agreement and HAP contract for the current landlord and unit address. In addition to the above, during our new admissions testing (3 tested out of 22 new admissions) we noted the following: ? 1 error where the request for tenancy form was signed three days after voucher expiration with no proof of extension in the file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was signed by the owner more than 11 months after the move-in date. Criteria 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as complete and accurate tenant files. In addition, the Authority?s administrative plan also requires following proper procedures for determination of HAP and documentation in the tenant files. Questioned Costs: None. Effect The Authority is not in compliance with all of the HUD requirements regarding eligibility and tenant recertification, which could result in incorrect total tenant payments for rent and HAP payments to landlords. Cause Procedures to ensure compliance with all of the HUD requirements were not being carefully followed. Recommendation The Authority should correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and utilize an ongoing quality control review process on the entire tenant population to ensure proper compliance with the requirements related to tenant eligibility. Ongoing staff training and timely management reviews should be utilized to ensure staff is aware of acceptable procedures. In addition, the Authority should review staffing levels, skill sets and case load. Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee We concur with the recommendation and have implemented various controls. A tenant file and unit quality control procedure has been developed and implemented. See corrective action plan.
2022-002 Special Tests and Provisions ? Income Targeting Program: U.S. Department of HUD: Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (CFDA 14.871) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance This is a repeat finding of 2021-002 from June 30, 2021 Statement of Condition The Authority did not have adequate controls over income targeting to assure that the Authority is in compliance with this requirement. During our testing, we noted that tenants with incomes that were extremely low accounted for approximately 59% of new admissions during the fiscal year, which is below the minimum required percentage of 75%. Criteria During each fiscal year, at least 75% of the Authority?s new admissions in the Housing Choice Voucher Program must have incomes that do no exceed 30% of the area median income (?extremely low?) as published by HUD. Questioned Costs None. Effect The Authority does not appear to be in compliance with Section 8 income targeting requirements. Cause The Authority did not have sufficient internal controls in place to track income targeting. Recommendation We recommend the Authority assure that at least 75% of new admissions be in the extremely low-income bracket. This should be monitored throughout the year. The Authority can also select applicants on the waiting list who are extremely low income by bypassing others on the list that don?t meet the requirement and documenting that the person was selected ahead of others to be able to meet the requirement. 2022-002 Special Tests and Provisions ? Income Targeting (Continued) Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee: We concur with the recommendation. We will closely monitor new admissions and focus on applicants on the waiting list who meet the criteria as extremely low income so that the 75% requirement is met.