Finding 574119 (2024-001)

Significant Deficiency
Requirement
E
Questioned Costs
$1
Year
2024
Accepted
2025-08-21
Audit: 364699
Organization: Brockton Housing Authority (MA)

AI Summary

  • Core Issue: 13 out of 170 tenant files (7.6%) showed noncompliance with HUD eligibility and reporting requirements, affecting both Public Housing and Section 8 programs.
  • Impacted Requirements: Issues included miscalculations of income, lack of third-party verification, and discrepancies in Housing Assistance Payments, risking inaccurate subsidy determinations.
  • Recommended Follow-Up: Enhance staff training on rent calculations and verification procedures, and increase quality control reviews of tenant files and HAP adjustments.

Finding Text

Finding 2024-001 – Moving To Work Demonstration Tenant Files – Eligibility – Internal Control over Tenant Files – Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency Moving To Work Demonstration - Subsidy ALN 14.881 Condition & Cause: During our review of 170 tenant files under the Moving to Work (MTW) designation, comprised of 80 Public Housing and 90 Section 8 files, we identified 13 files (7.6%) in our sample with instances of noncompliance with HUD eligibility and reporting requirements. Six (6) of these noncompliant files pertained to Public Housing and seven (7) pertained to Section 8. Specifically: • Seven (7) files showed miscalculations of adjusted annual income • Five (5) files lacked third-party verification of reported income • Four (4) files included deductions that were not adequately verified • One (1) Section 8 file contained a discrepancy between the Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) reported on HUD Form 50058 and the actual amount paid to the landlord Using extrapolation, we concluded that the potential misstatement of subsidy from income miscalculations reflects 0.17% of Public Housing Operating Subsidy and Housing Assistance Payments combined and is immaterial to the financial statements. However, the likely questioned costs exceed the disclosure threshold and is reported in the Questioned Costs section below. We noted that the Agency had significant staff turnover during the audit period and believe this contributed to the deficiencies in income calculations. As a mitigating factor, management already had rent calculation training scheduled for staff as of our field visit. The HAP disagreement appears to be an isolated incident with an impact to one month stemming from multiple corrections and adjustments. Criteria: Compliance requirements are outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations, the Housing Authority’s Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy (ACOP), Administrative Plan, Moving To Work (MTW) Plan, and specific HUD guidelines for documenting and maintaining Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher tenant files. Effect: The deficiencies identified in income calculations, third-party verifications, and HAP reporting may lead to inaccurate subsidy determinations, resulting in potential over- or underpayments to landlords and incorrect tenant rent contributions. Ongoing noncompliance may also draw scrutiny from regulatory bodies, increasing the risk of financial penalties, decrease in funding for the Public Housing and Section 8 programs, or loss of MTW designation. Recommendation: We recommend that the Agency continue to offer and increase staff training in rent calculations and HUD preferred verification procedures. Additionally, we recommend the Agency increase quality control reviews over tenant files and HAP adjustments. Questioned Costs: Approximately $80,690 Repeat Finding: No Was sampling statistically valid? Yes Views of responsible officials: The PHA agrees with the results of the audit and recommendations.

Corrective Action Plan

The Brockton Housing Authority {The Authority) has reviewed and agrees with finding 2024-01. The Authority has experienced a large turnover in staff who are responsible for the calculations of rents and Housing Assistance Payments. Through promotions, retirements, and resignations 7 of the 10 staff primarily responsible for this function have left their positions in the last two years and have been replaced by staff new to the position. The Authority did increase quality control reviews due to the transition period. The finding does not identify a systemic issue rather it found various instances of noncompliance. Prior to the Audit the Authority scheduled a three-day onsite rent calculation training for all staff with Nan McKay inc that occurred the week of May 20, 2025. Finding 2024-001- Moving To Work Demonstration Tenant Files - Eligibility - Internal Control over Tenant Files - Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency Corrective Action Plan: The Authority will continue and enhance its training regimen for staff responsible for rent determination. Furthermore, the Authority has engaged the services of Edgemere Consulting. As part of this engagement Edgemere will conduct an independent quality control review of public housing and rental assistance files. From the information gathered from the file review Edgemere Consulting will develop specific training initiatives for the staff including enhanced quality control measures. Person Responsible: Bruna Campbell, Compliance officer Anticipated Completion Date: December 31, 2025 - Ongoing

Categories

Questioned Costs HUD Housing Programs Eligibility Reporting Significant Deficiency Internal Control / Segregation of Duties

Other Findings in this Audit

  • 574120 2024-001
    Significant Deficiency
  • 1150561 2024-001
    Significant Deficiency
  • 1150562 2024-001
    Significant Deficiency

Programs in Audit

ALN Program Name Expenditures
14.881 Moving to Work Demonstration Program $36.10M
14.879 Mainstream Vouchers $701,981
14.870 Resident Opportunity and Supportive Services - Service Coordinators $192,879