This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
OIG Evaluation of Auditee Comments
Comment 1 The audit evidence showed that 54 of the 66 housing units inspected did not meet
HUD鈥檚 housing quality standards, and 28 units had 98 violations that existed at
the time of the Authority鈥檚 previous inspection. The Authority鈥檚 reply does not
contain sufficient evidence to change the conclusions contained in this audit
report. Regarding the ground fault circuit interrupter, when our inspector tested
the ground fault circuit interrupters with his circuit tester, they did not trip. When
a ground fault circuit interrupter does not trip and stays on, it is because it was
improperly wired. This would have occurred when the ground fault circuit
interrupter was first installed, thus a preexisting condition.
Comment 2 The Authority accurately states in its reply that client identifications numbers for
two photographs were mislabeled and we have corrected this in the final report.
Comment 3 We reviewed all of the documentation the Authority provided during the audit
including the documentation it is now providing. All of this documentation has
been appropriately considered in the results and conclusions in this audit report.
Comment 4 The Authority accurately acknowledged that rent reasonableness surveys were not
in its files. These surveys are required by federal regulations to ensure rents paid
are reasonable. The related housing assistance payments are therefore classified
as unsupported costs in this audit report.
Comment 5 The extremely low error rates stated in the Authority鈥檚 reply are erroneous and
misleading. The Authority incorrectly compared the dollar value of errors
identified in our review of 74 housing choice voucher tenant files with the total
funding the Authority received for its approximately 2,200 housing choice
vouchers. The audit showed that 35 of 74 housing choice vouchers files
reviewed, or 47 percent, contained incorrect calculations. Therefore, the total
dollar value of payment errors for its approximately 2,200 housing choice
vouchers could be substantially higher. Additionally, the documentation that the
Authority provided was not sufficient evidence to clear the tenant calculation
errors identified in this report with the exception of one client, client identification
number 16989. The final report has been adjusted to reflect this change.
21Jump to an indexed page (31 of 31)