Finding Text
Section III - Federal Award Findings: 2022-002 Tenant Files: Eligibility 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 September 30, 2021 (Other Matter and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance). Originally reported as finding 2019-001 from September 30, 2019 (Material Weakness in Internal Control and Material Noncompliance) Statement of Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 1,114 vouchers, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 tenant file had the following errors: o The tenant?s annual recertification application is missing. o The tenant?s signed 9886 form is missing. o The wrong utility allowance schedule was used to calculate the tenants? utility allowance. Correcting this error would cause the HAP rent to increase by $9. o The tenant?s signed HAP contract is missing. ? 1 tenant file had the following errors: o The name and social security number for one of the tenant?s dependents was reported incorrectly on the 50058 form. o The tenant?s utility allowance was calculated correctly but was reported incorrectly on the 50058 form. Correcting this error would cause the HAP rent to increase by $56. ? 1 tenant file had the following errors: o The lease agreement was not signed by the tenant. o The tenant?s assets was reported in error. Correcting this error would cause the rent to increase by $8. ? 2 tenant files where the tenants? income was miscalculated. Correcting the errors would cause the HAP rent for one of tenant files to decrease by $12 and the other to increase by $181. ? 2 tenant files where the wrong utility allowance schedule was used to calculate the tenants? utility allowance. Correcting these errors would cause the HAP rent for one of the tenant files to decrease by $13 and the other to increase by $14. ? 1 tenant file where the family?s assets was reported in error. Correcting the errors had no effect on the HAP rent. ? 1 tenant file where a member of the household moved but was reported on the 50058 form. ? 1 tenant file where the tenant?s signed HAP contract is missing. ? 1 tenant file where the EIV report was never generated or was misplaced. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (out of a total of 118 new admission, 18 files were selected for testing.): ? 1 tenant file where the member of the household did not checkmark the checkbox on the 214-affidavit form indicating that they are a U.S. Citizen or permanent resident. However, the member?s birth certificate confirms that the member is a U.S. Citizen. ? 1 tenant file where the tenant?s signed 214-affidavit is missing. However, the member?s birth certificate confirms that the member is a U.S. Citizen. 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. In addition, the Authority experienced some turnover in the HCV department which contributed to these errors. 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: The Authority concurs with this finding. The Authority has an established review, oversight and training process for all of its staff and will continue to improve its review, oversight, and training process to ensure proper procedures are being followed.