Finding 1099193 (2024-001)

Finding 2024-001 – Moving to Work Resident Files – Eligibility – Rent Calculations & HAP Disbursements Noncompliance & Significant Deficiency – ALN #14.881 Condition & Cause: We reviewed twenty (20) HCV tenant-based resident files and fifteen (15) HCV project-based resident files for a total of thirty-five (35) Moving to Work resident files reviewed. In the TBV file review we noted one (1) instance of a resident’s income being miscalculated on HUD form 50058. The Authority understated the resident’s income which resulted in a lower rent charge amount than expected. We also discovered one (1) instance of the Authority issuing a double payment of HAP funding to a landlord. The total amount of the overpayment was $2,006 which has since been requested back from the property owner. Criteria: The Code of Federal regulations, the Housing Authority’s Administrative Plan and specific HUD guidelines in documenting and maintaining resident files. Effect: Improper disbursements of housing assistance payments can result in discrepancies on the financial statements as well as noncompliance with federal grant funds. Improper calculation and documentation of tenant income can lead to incorrect calculation of HAP subsidy and misstatements in the financial statements. 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 perform a comprehensive audit of tenant files for existing tenants to identify any additional deficiencies and assess the need for further staff training. Additionally, we suggest that the Agency enhance its quality control reviews 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 an extrapolated amount of $33,839 which is considered immaterial to the financial statements. Repeat Finding: No Was sampling statistically valid? Yes Views of responsible officials: The PHA agrees with the results of the audit and recommendations.