EIN: 383287458
UEI: UKW5VBK9GBC6
Showing data from August 20, 2026 — the Federal Audit Clearinghouse is under high demand right now, so this couldn't be refreshed. This is the most recent data on record, not necessarily today's.
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on March 31, 2026. Under 2 CFR 200.521(d), a pass-through entity that provided federal funds to this organization for this audit period must issue a management decision on these findings by October 1, 2026 (36 days from today).
What is a management decision? →While testing applicants that reached the top of the waiting list, and applicants that were admitted into the program, the Commission was unable to provide sufficient documentation to support the current status of the applicant. Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (a total of 51 tenants selected for testing): • For two tenants, no letter notifying the applicant they reached the top of the list was provided, • For two tenants, no copy of the preliminary waiting listing application was provided, • Two applicants were housed prior to fiscal year 2025, but were not removed from the waiting list, • One applicant who reached the top of the waiting list was not selected for voucher issuance, and • No documentation was provided to support one applicant being on the waiting list Low Rent Public Housing (a total of 45 tenants selected for testing): • One tenant admitted to the program was not located on a waiting list, and • For 40 applicants, support could not be obtained to determine the order of the applicants on the waiting list Criteria: Per 24 CFR 982.204, internal controls are required to be in place to ensure proper procedures are being followed to be in compliance with HUD requirements regarding waiting list applicant selection. Context: The auditor randomly selected 80 applicants from the top of the waiting list, and 16 tenants admitted to the program, which we consider to be a statistically valid sample size. tenant files out of the population from each program as outlined, which we consider to be a statistically valid sample size. The auditor reviewed the applicant’s file and support to ensure that proper procedures for selection from the waiting list are being followed and that the Commission is in compliance with HUD requirements regarding waiting list selection. The Commission was unable to provide support that applicants were informed they had reached the top of the waiting list, and did not retain information why an applicant was not issued a voucher, if applicable. Cause: The Commission did not save a static waiting list at the beginning of the fiscal year, and could not obtain the historical waiting list positions. Records pertaining to waiting lists, applications, and move-ins were not housed in the applicant management software. Effect: The Commission does not have adequate systems and controls in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements regarding the waiting list applicant selection process. Questioned Costs: Unknown. Auditor Recommendations: The Commission should reevaluate their established procedures and controls in place to ensure full compliance with HUD regulations regarding the waiting list selection process and document retention requirements. Management Response: See Corrective Action Plan.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2025-001 Special Tests and Provisions - Waiting List Moving to Work Demonstration Program AL No. 14.881 Material Weakness in internal control Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Condition: While testing applicants that reached the top of the waiting list, and applicants that were admitted into the program, the Commission was unable to provide sufficient documentation to support the current status of the applicant. Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (a total of 51 tenants selected for testing): • For two tenants, no letter notifying the applicant they reached the top of the list was provided, • For two tenants, no copy of the preliminary waiting listing application was provided, • Two applicants were housed prior to fiscal year 2025, but were not removed from the waiting list, • One applicant who reached the top of the waiting list was not selected for voucher issuance, and • No documentation was provided to support one applicant being on the waiting list Low Rent Public Housing (a total of 45 tenants selected for testing): • One tenant admitted to the program was not located on a waiting list, and • For 40 applicants, support could not be obtained to determine the order of the applicants on the waiting list Criteria: Per 24 CFR 982.204, internal controls are required to be in place to ensure proper procedures are being followed to be in compliance with HUD requirements regarding waiting list applicant selection. Context: The auditor randomly selected 80 applicants from the top of the waiting list, and 16 tenants admitted to the program, which we consider to be a statistically valid sample size. tenant files out of the population from each program as outlined, which we consider to be a statistically valid sample size. The auditor reviewed the applicant’s file and support to ensure that proper procedures for selection from the waiting list are being followed and that the Commission is in compliance with HUD requirements regarding waiting list selection. The Commission was unable to provide support that applicants were informed they had reached the top of the waiting list, and did not retain information why an applicant was not issued a voucher, if applicable. Cause: The Commission did not save a static waiting list at the beginning of the fiscal year, and could not obtain the historical waiting list positions. Records pertaining to waiting lists, applications, and move-ins were not housed in the applicant management software. Effect: The Commission does not have adequate systems and controls in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements regarding the waiting list applicant selection process. Questioned Costs: Unknown. Auditor Recommendations: The Commission should reevaluate their established procedures and controls in place to ensure full compliance with HUD regulations regarding the waiting list selection process and document retention requirements. Management Response: See Corrective Action Plan.
Action Taken: GRHC Response & Corrective Action Plan The Commission acknowledges the findings related to waiting list documentation and internal control weaknesses under the Moving to Work Demonstration Program. The conditions identified are largely attributable to limitations within the Commission’s prior software system, which did not consistently retain or generate historical reporting necessary to fully support waiting list actions, applicant status changes, or selection sequencing. While processes were in place, the ability to produce documentation in an audit-ready format was not always achievable. Effective February 1, 2026, the Commission transitioned to Yardi Voyager, which includes enhanced waiting list management functionality aligned with industry best practices and HUD expectations. Under the new system, all waiting list activities, including application intake, updates, selection, and removal, are tracked with system-generated audit trails, time-stamped records, and user activity logs to ensure full traceability. Standardized reports are now readily available to document waiting list position, ranking methodology, applicant notifications, application history, and removal or selection justification, allowing for consistent and reproducible audit support. In addition, the Commission has reinforced internal procedures to ensure proper documentation of all applicant communications, timely updates to applicant status, and consistent use of system workflows to eliminate off-system tracking. Staff have been trained on updated protocols and documentation expectations, and supervisory review processes have been implemented to promote accountability and consistency. The Commission will also conduct periodic internal file and reporting reviews to ensure continued compliance with HUD requirements and Uniform Guidance standards. While the findings reflect documentation gaps under the prior system, the Commission has taken corrective action through system conversion and strengthened internal controls, and the current environment ensures that all required documentation is maintained and audit-ready moving forward. Corrective Actions & Implementation Plan Corrective Action Responsible Group Completion Date Status Yardi Implementation Agency Wide 2/1/26 Completed Waiting List Purge Agency Wide 3/31 In Process Reports Available Agency Wide 4/30 To be Completed Expected Outcome • Full compliance with HUD requirements for waiting list management. • Improved internal controls to prevent future deficiencies. • A sustainable QC system for ongoing compliance monitoring. Monitoring & Follow-Up • The Policy and Program Implementation Manager will oversee corrective actions and provide bi-weekly progress updates. • The Executive Director will present the Corrective Action Plan at the next board meeting. Contact Person: Jose L. Capeles Title: Policy and Program Planning and Implementation Manager Date: 03/31/2026 Sincerely yours, Lindsey Reames Executive Director
FAC accepted this audit on March 30, 2025 — management decision was due September 30, 2025.
Out of an approximate population of 4,700 of Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and 220 Low Rent Public Housing tenants the following deficiencies were noted: Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (a total of 40 tenants selected for testing): • Four files did not have annual recertifications performed during the year available, • Four files did not use the correct utility allowance, • One file did not have support necessary to verify income adjustments, • One file did not use the correct payment standard, • One file did not have support necessary to verify income exemptions, • Six files did not have documentation necessary to verify the reported income, • Seven files did not have a 214 declaration for a member of the household, and • Two files did not have documentation necessary to verify custody of dependent Low Rent Public Housing (a total of 20 tenants selected for testing): • One file did not contain a flat rent options form, • Two files did not have documentation necessary to verify the reported income, • One file did not have a 214 declaration for a member of the household, • One file did not have support necessary to verify income adjustments, • Two files did not have 9886 release of information from within 15 months of the annual recertification, and • Two files did not have an internal control document Criteria: The Commission’s ACOP, Administrative Plan, 24 CFR 960.259, and 24 CFR 982.516 require internal controls to be in place to ensure proper procedures are being followed in compliance with HUD requirements regarding timely, complete, and accurate tenant files. Context: The auditor randomly selected tenant files out of the population from each program as outlined, which we consider to be a statistically valid sample size. The auditor reviewed the tenant files and support to ensure that proper procedures are being followed and that the Commission is in compliance with HUD requirements regarding timely, complete, and accurate tenant files. Cause: The Commission does not have adequate systems and controls in place to ensure all eligibility requirements are being followed. Effect: The Commission is not in compliance with all of the HUD requirements regarding eligibility and tenant recertification which could result in incorrect amount of rental assistance being provided. Questioned Costs: Unknown. Auditor Recommendations: The Commission should reevaluate their established procedures and controls in place to ensure full compliance in regards to eligibility and the timeliness of recertifications. The Commission needs to correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and consider the impact to the rest of the population of tenant files that were not selected as part of the auditor’s sample. Management Response: See Corrective Action Plan.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2024-001 Eligibility Moving to Work Demonstration Program AL No. 14.881 Significant deficiency in internal control Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Condition: Out of an approximate population of 4,700 of Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and 220 Low Rent Public Housing tenants the following deficiencies were noted: Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (a total of 40 tenants selected for testing): • Four files did not have annual recertifications performed during the year available, • Four files did not use the correct utility allowance, • One file did not have support necessary to verify income adjustments, • One file did not use the correct payment standard, • One file did not have support necessary to verify income exemptions, • Six files did not have documentation necessary to verify the reported income, • Seven files did not have a 214 declaration for a member of the household, and • Two files did not have documentation necessary to verify custody of dependent Low Rent Public Housing (a total of 20 tenants selected for testing): • One file did not contain a flat rent options form, • Two files did not have documentation necessary to verify the reported income, • One file did not have a 214 declaration for a member of the household, • One file did not have support necessary to verify income adjustments, • Two files did not have 9886 release of information from within 15 months of the annual recertification, and • Two files did not have an internal control document Criteria: The Commission’s ACOP, Administrative Plan, 24 CFR 960.259, and 24 CFR 982.516 require internal controls to be in place to ensure proper procedures are being followed in compliance with HUD requirements regarding timely, complete, and accurate tenant files. Context: The auditor randomly selected tenant files out of the population from each program as outlined, which we consider to be a statistically valid sample size. The auditor reviewed the tenant files and support to ensure that proper procedures are being followed and that the Commission is in compliance with HUD requirements regarding timely, complete, and accurate tenant files. Cause: The Commission does not have adequate systems and controls in place to ensure all eligibility requirements are being followed. Effect: The Commission is not in compliance with all of the HUD requirements regarding eligibility and tenant recertification which could result in incorrect amount of rental assistance being provided. Questioned Costs: Unknown. Auditor Recommendations: The Commission should reevaluate their established procedures and controls in place to ensure full compliance in regards to eligibility and the timeliness of recertifications. The Commission needs to correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and consider the impact to the rest of the population of tenant files that were not selected as part of the auditor’s sample. Management Response: See Corrective Action Plan.
GRHC Response & Corrective Action Plan The GRHC does not dispute the finding and acknowledges the deficiencies identified. Due to staff shortages and turnover, GRHC experienced challenges in maintaining consistent file management, eligibility determinations, and recertifications in strict compliance with HUD requirements. However, prior to the auditor’s testing that resulted in this finding, the GRHC had already begun discussing strategies to address these issues. Recognizing the need for stronger internal controls and process improvements, the GRHC initiated a plan to enhance file management, compliance monitoring, and process reviews. This plan includes: Process Mapping of Critical Functions to standardize workflows, ensure consistency, and eliminate inefficiencies. Digitization of forms to improve efficiency and reduce errors. Electronic document signing to streamline tenant file processing. Internal control checklists to ensure completeness and accuracy before file submission. Quality control (QC) review of all files by a manager before final submission to ensure compliance with HUD regulations. Strategies for these improvements began in August 2024 and are scheduled for full implementation by July 2025. GRHC leadership has been actively monitoring these efforts and meeting regularly to ensure progress toward compliance. Corrective Actions & Implementation Plan Corrective Action Responsible Group Completion Date Status Process mapping of critical workflows to ensure standardized procedures for eligibility and recertifications. Policy and Program Feb 2025 Completed Implement digitization of forms to streamline eligibility and recertification processes. Policy and Program 30-Apr-25 In Progress Introduce electronic document signing to enhance efficiency and reduce processing time. Policy and Program /IT 30-Apr-25 In Progress Develop and enforce internal control checklists for eligibility and recertifications. Policy and Program/IT 31-May In Progress Provide staff training on new processes and HUD compliance requirements. Policy and Program 30-Apr-25 Planned Conduct internal audits to evaluate the effectiveness of the new controls before manager QC begins. Policy and Program 30-Jun-25 Planned Require manager-level QC review of all tenant files before submission. Program Managers 01-Jul-25 Planned Implement a formal backup plan to ensure timely eligibility processing during staff absences or workload surges. ED/Program Directors 01-July-25 Planned Regular reporting to GRHC leadership on the status of tenant file compliance improvements. ED/Policy and Program Ongoing Planned Expected Outcome Full compliance with HUD requirements for eligibility and recertifications. Improved internal controls to prevent future deficiencies. A sustainable QC system for ongoing compliance monitoring. Monitoring & Follow-Up The Policy and Program Implementation Manager will oversee corrective actions and provide bi-weekly progress updates. The Executive Director will present the Corrective Action Plan at the next board meeting. Contact Person: Jose L. Capeles Title: Policy and Program Planning and Implementation Manager Date: 03/28/2025
FAC accepted this audit on October 27, 2020 — management decision was due April 27, 2021.
CFDA Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development - Direct programs - CFDA 14.871 - Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers and CFDA 14.879 - Mainstream Vouchers Federal Award Identification Number and Year - MI073VO-various Pass-through Entity - Not applicable Finding Type - Significant deficiency in internal control over eligibility Repeat Finding - No Criteria - Under the Housing Choice Voucher Program, the Commission accepts applications for rental assistance, selects applicants for admission, and issues family vouchers confirming eligibility. The family then leases an apartment unit, and the Commission pays a subsidy to the owner of the unit leased to the family for the portion of rent (Housing Assistance Payment - HAP) that the family does not pay based on income limits. Under 24 CFR 5.230, 5.609, and 982.516, the Commission must verify and maintain documents supporting the family income eligibility, which is recertified annually. According to 24 CFR 982.516 (f), the Commission is also required to establish procedures that are appropriate and necessary to ensure that income data provided by the applicant or participant families is accurate and complete. Under 24 CFR Section 982.517, the Commission must also maintain an up-to-date utility allowance schedule and use the applicable utility allowance in the calculation of rent on the HUD-50058 form. Condition - For five tenant files tested, the calculations of the utility allowance reported on form HUD-50058 did not include accurate information to support the amount of the utility allowance for certain months of the year ended June 30, 2019. Questioned Costs - $377 Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - The questioned costs are composed of the amount of rent charged to the tenant and the utility allowance versus what should have been charged and paid using the appropriate tenant income and the appropriate utility allowance. Context - In 5 tenant files selected from a sample of 40 tenant files, errors were noted in utility calculations reported on the HUD-50058 form. Cause and Effect - The Commission has controls in place that should prevent such errors from occurring through the use of procedures checklists and quality control eligibility review. However, the Commission's review process failed to identify and timely resolve improper calculations included in two of the HUD-50058 forms tested, resulting in the calculation of incorrect tenant rent and utility allowance of the two leased tenant units. Recommendation - The Commission should ensure that the review process is enhanced to ensure that utility allowance calculations are accurate, which will result in the correct tenant paid rent and utility allowance. Views of Responsible Officals and Corrective Actions Plan - The Commission will implement procedures to ensure that all files are reviewed for correct income and utility calculations.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴CFDA Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development - Direct programs - CFDA 14.871 - Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers and CFDA 14.879 - Mainstream Vouchers Federal Award Identification Number and Year - MI073VO-various Pass-through Entity - Not applicable Finding Type - Significant deficiency in internal control over eligibility Repeat Finding - No Criteria - Under the Housing Choice Voucher Program, the Commission accepts applications for rental assistance, selects applicants for admission, and issues family vouchers confirming eligibility. The family then leases an apartment unit, and the Commission pays a subsidy to the owner of the unit leased to the family for the portion of rent (Housing Assistance Payment - HAP) that the family does not pay based on income limits. Under 24 CFR 5.230, 5.609, and 982.516, the Commission must verify and maintain documents supporting the family income eligibility, which is recertified annually. According to 24 CFR 982.516 (f), the Commission is also required to establish procedures that are appropriate and necessary to ensure that income data provided by the applicant or participant families is accurate and complete. Under 24 CFR Section 982.517, the Commission must also maintain an up-to-date utility allowance schedule and use the applicable utility allowance in the calculation of rent on the HUD-50058 form. Condition - For five tenant files tested, the calculations of the utility allowance reported on form HUD-50058 did not include accurate information to support the amount of the utility allowance for certain months of the year ended June 30, 2019. Questioned Costs - $377 Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - The questioned costs are composed of the amount of rent charged to the tenant and the utility allowance versus what should have been charged and paid using the appropriate tenant income and the appropriate utility allowance. Context - In 5 tenant files selected from a sample of 40 tenant files, errors were noted in utility calculations reported on the HUD-50058 form. Cause and Effect - The Commission has controls in place that should prevent such errors from occurring through the use of procedures checklists and quality control eligibility review. However, the Commission's review process failed to identify and timely resolve improper calculations included in two of the HUD-50058 forms tested, resulting in the calculation of incorrect tenant rent and utility allowance of the two leased tenant units. Recommendation - The Commission should ensure that the review process is enhanced to ensure that utility allowance calculations are accurate, which will result in the correct tenant paid rent and utility allowance. Views of Responsible Officals and Corrective Actions Plan - The Commission will implement procedures to ensure that all files are reviewed for correct income and utility calculations.
Finding Number: 2019-001 Condition: For five tenant files tested, the calculations of the utility allowance reported on form HUD-50058 did not include accurate information to support the amount of the utility allowance for certain months of the year ended June 30, 2019. Planned Corrective Action: The Grand Rapids Housing Commission Housing Choice Voucher Program staff will receive additional training on utility allowances by April 2020 and staff will incorporate quarterly file reviews on utility allowances, starting March 2020. Contact person responsible for corrective action: Judy Cannon-Groce, Director of Leased Housing Anticipated Completion Date: 04/30/2020
FAC accepted this audit on December 30, 2018 — management decision was due June 30, 2019.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴FAC accepted this audit on December 17, 2017 — management decision was due June 17, 2018.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴FAC accepted this audit on December 21, 2016 — management decision was due June 21, 2017.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Data source: This information comes from the Federal Audit Clearinghouse, the official repository of Single Audit data. All data is public domain. Verify this organization's audit history at fac.gov.
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →Monitor subrecipient audit findings and compliance status.
Start monitoring →© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.