Finding 1092298 (2024-002)

Material Weakness Repeat Finding
Requirement
E
Questioned Costs
-
Year
2024
Accepted
2024-12-19

AI Summary

  • Core Issue: The Housing Authority failed to maintain an accurate waiting list for the Housing Choice Voucher Program, leading to noncompliance with its Administrative Plan.
  • Impacted Requirements: Delays in processing applications and notifying applicants violated 24 CFR 982 Subpart E, risking grievances and jeopardizing funding.
  • Recommended Follow-Up: Monitor compliance, provide staff training on the new software, and ensure clear communication of the selection process and updates.

Finding Text

Finding 2024-002 – Housing Choice Voucher Program – Internal Control over Waiting List – Noncompliance and Material Weakness - Housing Choice Voucher Program – ALN 14.871 Condition & Cause: During our review of the Section 8 waiting list, we assessed the audit trail for several tenants admitted in the fiscal year and were unable to gain assurance that the application and selection processes complied with the Agency’s Administrative Plan. Applications and preference updates received by the Agency were not entered into the internal Excel spreadsheet which constituted the waiting list. At the time, applications were only accepted in paper form and were not entered promptly due to administrative burdens. The Authority intended to update the waiting list as staff capacity allowed or when the highest preference point thresholds were depleted, a process that typically took over a year. Consequently, the Agency did not ensure that the waiting list accurately reflected housing needs. In our examination of a selection batch from May 2022, we reviewed a sample of sixty-nine (69) applicants. We found that no high preference point individuals were selected from this batch due to those preference point thresholds being depleted. Since the last waiting list generation was in April 2021, families who applied during the 13-month interim with higher preference points were not considered for housing because their applications had not been entered. Additionally, we found that the preference point ratio for selection, outlined in the Administrative Plan, was not upheld. This occurred because the Agency did not mail selection notices to a significant number of applicants in a timely manner. We also observed discrepancies between the waiting list admissions process and the Authority’s FY 2024 SEMAP self-assessment for Indicator #1. Although we reviewed the supporting documentation for this indicator without finding deviations, it is important to investigate the discrepancy, especially since the Authority had a similar audit finding in the prior year (Finding 2023-002). We note that the Authority has faced challenges in hiring, training, and retaining qualified staff in the HCV department. Furthermore, the largely manual processes in place during the audit period were prone to error, contributing to the potential non-compliance with the Administrative Plan. However, subsequent to year end, the Authority underwent a software conversion and updated local policies to simplify local preferences, which should alleviate the administrative burden associated with applications and selections from the waiting list. Criteria: 24 CFR 982 Subpart E and the Housing Authority’s Administrative Plan Effect: Delaying processing applications and informing applicants of selection undermines the integrity of the waiting list process, potentially leading to grievances from applicants who believe they were unfairly passed over. This could result in non-compliance with HUD regulations and could jeopardize future funding or program participation. Recommendation: We recommend that the Agency continue monitoring compliance in this area and evaluate the need for additional training for staff involved in the admissions process with the new housing software. The Agency should also ensure that the selection process is clearly communicated to all relevant staff and that any changes or updates are documented and disseminated promptly. Questioned Costs: None Repeat Finding: Yes Was sampling statistically valid? Yes Views of responsible officials: The PHA agrees with the results of the audit and recommendations.

Categories

HUD Housing Programs Subrecipient Monitoring Material Weakness Internal Control / Segregation of Duties

Other Findings in this Audit

  • 515855 2024-001
    Material Weakness Repeat
  • 515856 2024-002
    Material Weakness Repeat
  • 1092297 2024-001
    Material Weakness Repeat

Programs in Audit

ALN Program Name Expenditures
14.850 Public and Indian Housing $4.31M
14.872 Public Housing Capital Fund $2.97M
14.871 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers $1.08M
14.856 Lower Income Housing Assistance Program_section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation $332,128