EIN: 591797053
UEI: YZA4MLDHH9G7
Data as of August 22, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on March 30, 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 September 30, 2026 (39 days from today).
What is a management decision? →Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,025 tenants, a sample of 25 files was selected for testing. Exceptions were noted in 9 of the 25 files, categorized as follows: • 3 tenant file errors where the Authority did not generate the required EIV form. • 1 tenant file had the following errors: o The Authority did not generate the required EIV form. o The child support income was miscalculated and SNAP benefits were included in the income calculation. Correcting the income errors increased the HAP rent from $774 to $869. • 1 tenant file error where the child support income was miscalculated. Correcting the error would decrease the HAP rent from $1,500 to $1,476. • 1 tenant file error where the tenant’s income was miscalculated. Correcting the error would decrease HAP rent from $552 to $279. • 1 tenant file where the tenant’s income was miscalculated. Correcting the issue would increase the HAP rent from $501 to $517. • 1 tenant file error where medical expenses were erroneously reported on the HUD-50058 form. Correcting the error would decrease the HAP rent from $524 to $500. • 1 tenant file error where the utility allowance was miscalculated. Correcting this error would increase the HAP rent from $1,027 to $1,145. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain complete and accurate tenant files. In addition, the Authority’s Administrative Plan requires staff to follow proper procedures for the determination of HAP and to maintain adequate documentation in tenant files. Questioned Costs: None reported. Effect: The Authority is not in compliance with all HUD requirements regarding eligibility and tenant recertifications. This lack of compliance resulted in incorrect Total Tenant Payments and both overpayments and underpayments of HAP to landlords. Cause: Established procedures to ensure compliance with HUD requirements were not consistently followed, and there was a lack of sufficient secondary quality control reviews to catch clerical errors prior to finalization. Recommendation: The Authority should correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and utilize an ongoing, secondary quality control review process for a sample of the entire tenant population to ensure proper compliance with eligibility requirements. Furthermore, management should provide ongoing staff training, conduct timely reviews of tenant files, and evaluate current staffing levels, skill sets and caseloads to ensure staff have the capacity to execute their duties accurately. Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee: The Authority concurs with this finding and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2025-001 Eligibility – Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 – Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Statement of Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,025 tenants, a sample of 25 files was selected for testing. Exceptions were noted in 9 of the 25 files, categorized as follows: • 3 tenant file errors where the Authority did not generate the required EIV form. • 1 tenant file had the following errors: o The Authority did not generate the required EIV form. o The child support income was miscalculated and SNAP benefits were included in the income calculation. Correcting the income errors increased the HAP rent from $774 to $869. • 1 tenant file error where the child support income was miscalculated. Correcting the error would decrease the HAP rent from $1,500 to $1,476. • 1 tenant file error where the tenant’s income was miscalculated. Correcting the error would decrease HAP rent from $552 to $279. • 1 tenant file where the tenant’s income was miscalculated. Correcting the issue would increase the HAP rent from $501 to $517. • 1 tenant file error where medical expenses were erroneously reported on the HUD-50058 form. Correcting the error would decrease the HAP rent from $524 to $500. • 1 tenant file error where the utility allowance was miscalculated. Correcting this error would increase the HAP rent from $1,027 to $1,145. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain complete and accurate tenant files. In addition, the Authority’s Administrative Plan requires staff to follow proper procedures for the determination of HAP and to maintain adequate documentation in tenant files. Questioned Costs: None reported. Effect: The Authority is not in compliance with all HUD requirements regarding eligibility and tenant recertifications. This lack of compliance resulted in incorrect Total Tenant Payments and both overpayments and underpayments of HAP to landlords. Cause: Established procedures to ensure compliance with HUD requirements were not consistently followed, and there was a lack of sufficient secondary quality control reviews to catch clerical errors prior to finalization. Recommendation: The Authority should correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and utilize an ongoing, secondary quality control review process for a sample of the entire tenant population to ensure proper compliance with eligibility requirements. Furthermore, management should provide ongoing staff training, conduct timely reviews of tenant files, and evaluate current staffing levels, skill sets and caseloads to ensure staff have the capacity to execute their duties accurately. Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee: The Authority concurs with this finding and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
2025-001 Eligibility – Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 – Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Statement of Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,025 tenants, a sample of 25 files was selected for testing. Exceptions were noted in 9 of the 25 files, categorized as follows: • 3 tenant file errors where the Authority did not generate the required EIV form. • 1 tenant file had the following errors: o The Authority did not generate the required EIV form. o The child support income was miscalculated and SNAP benefits were included in the income calculation. Correcting the income errors increased the HAP rent from $774 to $869. • 1 tenant file error where the child support income was miscalculated. Correcting the error would decrease the HAP rent from $1,500 to $1,476. • 1 tenant file error where the tenant’s income was miscalculated. Correcting the error would decrease HAP rent from $552 to $279. • 1 tenant file where the tenant’s income was miscalculated. Correcting the issue would increase the HAP rent from $501 to $517. • 1 tenant file error where medical expenses were erroneously reported on the HUD-50058 form. Correcting the error would decrease the HAP rent from $524 to $500. • 1 tenant file error where the utility allowance was miscalculated. Correcting this error would increase the HAP rent from $1,027 to $1,145. Recommendation: The Authority should correct the deficiencies noted in the tested files and utilize an ongoing, secondary quality control review process for a sample of the entire tenant population to ensure proper compliance with eligibility requirements. Furthermore, management should provide ongoing staff training, conduct timely reviews of tenant files, and evaluate current staffing levels, skill sets and caseloads to ensure staff have the capacity to execute their duties accurately. Action Taken: The Authority concurs with this finding and has implemented a robust file review process, enhanced quality control procedures, and provided training on errors noted along with annual program training for all staff. The cited files were corrected.
FAC accepted this audit on March 22, 2024 — management decision was due September 22, 2024.
Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,179 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: • 1 error where the signed lease agreement in the file had the wrong rent amount, however HAP and tenant rent payments being made were correct. • 1 error where file had wrong date of birth for a family member, however this had no effect on HAP rent. • 1 error where lease agreement in file did not state the monthly rent amount, however HAP and tenant rent payments being made were correct. • 1 error where a disability and dependent allowance that family qualified for was not deducted from their income. This increased HAP rent by $21. • 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using the prior year schedule. This increased HAP rent by $18. • 1 file where data entry error on the 50058 caused wage income to be reported incorrectly. This decreased HAP rent by $10. • 1 error where the HAP contract in the file had the wrong rent amount, however the correct rent was reported on 50058. • 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using 3 bedrooms when it should have been 2 bedrooms. This had no effect on HAP rent. • 1 file with math errors on calculating both wage and child support income. This increased HAP rent by $28. • 2 files with math errors on calculating child support income. This had no effect on HAP rent for one file and decreased HAP rent by $8 on the other. • 1 error where EIV report did not include one member of the household, however file did contain the member of the household’s social security card and birth certificate. • 1 file where Authority did not properly verify reported change in income from loss of job for one member of the household. As a result, tenant’s income was not calculated correctly, however the impact on HAP rent is undeterminable. 2023-001 Eligibility – Tenant Files (Continued) In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (19 new admissions tested out of population of 190 new admissions): • 1 error where the 214 affidavit was not properly checked to indicate member of household was an eligible citizen. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2023-001 Eligibility – Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 – Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Repeat finding from June 30, 2022 as Finding 2022-002 (initially reported June 30, 2010) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,179 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: • 1 error where the signed lease agreement in the file had the wrong rent amount, however HAP and tenant rent payments being made were correct. • 1 error where file had wrong date of birth for a family member, however this had no effect on HAP rent. • 1 error where lease agreement in file did not state the monthly rent amount, however HAP and tenant rent payments being made were correct. • 1 error where a disability and dependent allowance that family qualified for was not deducted from their income. This increased HAP rent by $21. • 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using the prior year schedule. This increased HAP rent by $18. • 1 file where data entry error on the 50058 caused wage income to be reported incorrectly. This decreased HAP rent by $10. • 1 error where the HAP contract in the file had the wrong rent amount, however the correct rent was reported on 50058. • 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using 3 bedrooms when it should have been 2 bedrooms. This had no effect on HAP rent. • 1 file with math errors on calculating both wage and child support income. This increased HAP rent by $28. • 2 files with math errors on calculating child support income. This had no effect on HAP rent for one file and decreased HAP rent by $8 on the other. • 1 error where EIV report did not include one member of the household, however file did contain the member of the household’s social security card and birth certificate. • 1 file where Authority did not properly verify reported change in income from loss of job for one member of the household. As a result, tenant’s income was not calculated correctly, however the impact on HAP rent is undeterminable. 2023-001 Eligibility – Tenant Files (Continued) In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (19 new admissions tested out of population of 190 new admissions): • 1 error where the 214 affidavit was not properly checked to indicate member of household was an eligible citizen. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
Finding No. 2023-001 Eligibility – Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 – Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Repeat finding from June 30, 2022 as Finding 2022-002 (initially reported June 30, 2010) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,179 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: • 1 error where the signed lease agreement in the file had the wrong rent amount, however HAP and tenant rent payments being made were correct. • 1 error where file had wrong date of birth for a family member, however this had no effect on HAP rent. • 1 error where lease agreement in file did not state the monthly rent amount, however HAP and tenant rent payments being made were correct. • 1 error where a disability and dependent allowance that family qualified for was not deducted from their income. This increased HAP rent by $21. • 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using the prior year schedule. This increased HAP rent by $18. • 1 file where data entry error on the 50058 caused wage income to be reported incorrectly. This decreased HAP rent by $10. • 1 error where the HAP contract in the file had the wrong rent amount, however the correct rent was reported on 50058. • 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using 3 bedrooms when it should have been 2 bedrooms. This had no effect on HAP rent. • 1 file with math errors on calculating both wage and child support income. This increased HAP rent by $28. • 2 files with math errors on calculating child support income. This had no effect on HAP rent for one file and decreased HAP rent by $8 on the other. • 1 error where EIV report did not include one member of the household, however file did contain the member of the household’s social security card and birth certificate. • 1 file where Authority did not properly verify reported change in income from loss of job for one member of the household. As a result, tenant’s income was not calculated correctly, however the impact on HAP rent is undeterminable. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (19 new admissions tested out of a population of 190 new admissions): • 1 error where the 214 affidavit was not properly checked to indicate member of household was an eligible citizen. 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. Action Taken: The Authority concurs with this finding and has implemented a robust file review process, enhanced quality control procedures, and provided training on errors noted along with annual program training for all staff. The cited files were corrected. Effective Date: March 18, 2024 Contact Information Brenda Williams, Executive Director Tallahassee Housing Authority 2940 Grady Road Tallahassee, Florida 32312 (850) 385-6126
2022-002
FAC accepted this audit on March 15, 2023 — management decision was due September 15, 2023.
Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,100 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the wrong amount was used to calculate tenant?s wage income. This had no effect on HAP rent. ? 1 error where overtime earnings was not included in calculating tenant?s wage income. This caused HAP rent to decrease by $11. ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated incorrectly. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $61. ? 1 error where the prior year utility allowance schedule was used instead of the current year. This had no effect on HAP rent. ? 1 error where adoption subsidy benefits were calculated incorrectly as well as the amount excluded from income. This decreased HAP rent by $9. ? 1 error where $1,753 in unreimbursed medical expenses was carried forward from the prior year 50058 and file had no support for any medical expenses in current year. This decreased HAP rent by $22 ? 1 error where there was no EIV report in file In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (21 new admissions tested): ? 1 error where there was no signed 214 affidavit in the file for one member of the household Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2022-002 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Repeat finding from June 30, 2021 as Finding 2021-001 (initially reported June 30, 2010) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,100 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the wrong amount was used to calculate tenant?s wage income. This had no effect on HAP rent. ? 1 error where overtime earnings was not included in calculating tenant?s wage income. This caused HAP rent to decrease by $11. ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated incorrectly. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $61. ? 1 error where the prior year utility allowance schedule was used instead of the current year. This had no effect on HAP rent. ? 1 error where adoption subsidy benefits were calculated incorrectly as well as the amount excluded from income. This decreased HAP rent by $9. ? 1 error where $1,753 in unreimbursed medical expenses was carried forward from the prior year 50058 and file had no support for any medical expenses in current year. This decreased HAP rent by $22 ? 1 error where there was no EIV report in file In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (21 new admissions tested): ? 1 error where there was no signed 214 affidavit in the file for one member of the household Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
2022-002 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Repeat finding from June 30, 2021 as Finding 2021-001 (initially reported June 30, 2010) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,100 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the wrong amount was used to calculate tenant?s wage income. This had no effect on HAP rent. ? 1 error where overtime earnings was not included in calculating tenant?s wage income. This caused HAP rent to decrease by $11. ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated incorrectly. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $61. ? 1 error where the prior year utility allowance schedule was used instead of the current year. This had no effect on HAP rent. ? 1 error where adoption subsidy benefits were calculated incorrectly as well as the amount excluded from income. This decreased HAP rent by $9. ? 1 error where $1,753 in unreimbursed medical expenses was carried forward from the prior year 50058 and file had no support for any medical expenses in current year. This decreased HAP rent by $22 ? 1 error where there was no EIV report in file In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (21 new admissions tested): ? 1 error where there was no signed 214 affidavit in the file for one member of the household 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. Action Taken: The Authority concurs with this finding and has implemented a robust file review process, enhanced quality control procedures, and provided training on errors noted along with annual program training for all staff. The cited files were corrected.
2021-001
Out of a total population of 166 failed inspections, 17 failed inspections were selected for testing in a statistically valid sample. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where unit never passed inspection and the Authority continued to make HAP payments when the contract should have been abated. Criteria: For units under HAP contract that fail to meet HQS, the PHA must require the owner to correct any life threatening HQS deficiencies within 24 hours after the inspections and all other HQS deficiencies within 30 calendar days or within a specified PHA-approved extension. If the owner does not correct the cited HQS deficiencies within the specified correction period, the PHA must stop (abate) HAPs beginning no later than the first of the month following the specified correction period or must terminate the HAP contract. Cause: Compliance with all of the HUD requirements was not being carefully followed and the Authority lacked procedures for proper oversight and review of employees performing these compliance procedures. Effect: The Authority is not in compliance with all of the HUD requirements regarding Housing Quality Standards, which could result in tenants living in unsafe conditions. Questioned Costs: None. Recommendation: The Authority should more closely monitor failed inspections to make sure that any units that have not passed re-inspection are not issued HAP payments until all repairs are made, and the HAP contract is terminated for any unit for which the owner has not made repairs within the allowed timeframe. 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 and will establish more review, oversight and training for the staff responsible for these procedures.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2022-003 Special Tests and Provisions ? Housing Quality Standards Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Condition: Out of a total population of 166 failed inspections, 17 failed inspections were selected for testing in a statistically valid sample. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where unit never passed inspection and the Authority continued to make HAP payments when the contract should have been abated. Criteria: For units under HAP contract that fail to meet HQS, the PHA must require the owner to correct any life threatening HQS deficiencies within 24 hours after the inspections and all other HQS deficiencies within 30 calendar days or within a specified PHA-approved extension. If the owner does not correct the cited HQS deficiencies within the specified correction period, the PHA must stop (abate) HAPs beginning no later than the first of the month following the specified correction period or must terminate the HAP contract. Cause: Compliance with all of the HUD requirements was not being carefully followed and the Authority lacked procedures for proper oversight and review of employees performing these compliance procedures. Effect: The Authority is not in compliance with all of the HUD requirements regarding Housing Quality Standards, which could result in tenants living in unsafe conditions. Questioned Costs: None. Recommendation: The Authority should more closely monitor failed inspections to make sure that any units that have not passed re-inspection are not issued HAP payments until all repairs are made, and the HAP contract is terminated for any unit for which the owner has not made repairs within the allowed timeframe. 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 and will establish more review, oversight and training for the staff responsible for these procedures.
2022-003 Special Tests and Provisions ? Housing Quality Standards Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Condition: Out of a total population of 166 failed inspections, 17 failed inspections were selected for testing in a statistically valid sample. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where unit never passed inspection and the Authority continued to make HAP payments when the contract should have been abated. Recommendation: The Authority should more closely monitor failed inspections to make sure that any units that have not passed re-inspection are not issued HAP payments until all repairs are made, and the HAP contract is terminated for any unit for which the owner has not made repairs within the allowed timeframe. 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. Action Taken: The Authority concurs with this finding and will establish more review, oversight and training for the staff responsible for these procedures and assure that HAP payments are properly abated when repairs are not made within the required timeframes.
FAC accepted this audit on June 14, 2022 — management decision was due December 14, 2022.
Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,100 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the lease agreement was missing from the tenant file. ? 2 errors where it does not appear an EIV was run. ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using the prior year amounts, which caused the HAP rent to increase by $11. ? 2 errors where social security income was calculated using the prior year amount when there was documentation in the file indicating the current monthly amount. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $3 in both cases. ? 1 error where wage income was calculated on a weekly basis instead of bi-weekly, which caused the HAP rent to increase by $168. ? 1 error where wage income was calculated on a bi-weekly basis instead of weekly. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $195. ? 1 error where child support income was reported at an amount that was different than indicated in the file, for which there was no support. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $33. ? 1 error where general food assistance income was reported on the 50058 form when it should have been excluded. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $59. ? 1 error where there was no support for unreimbursed childcare expenses. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $150. ? 1 error where a tenant was receiving disability income but did not receive the disability deduction. This caused HAP rent to increase by $7. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (25 new admissions tested): ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was not signed until over 80 days after move-in. ? 1 error whether the inspection was not completed and passed until 8 days after move-in. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2021-001 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Material Weakness in Internal Control Material Noncompliance Repeat finding from June 30, 2020 as Finding 2020-001 (initially reported June 30, 2010) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,100 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the lease agreement was missing from the tenant file. ? 2 errors where it does not appear an EIV was run. ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using the prior year amounts, which caused the HAP rent to increase by $11. ? 2 errors where social security income was calculated using the prior year amount when there was documentation in the file indicating the current monthly amount. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $3 in both cases. ? 1 error where wage income was calculated on a weekly basis instead of bi-weekly, which caused the HAP rent to increase by $168. ? 1 error where wage income was calculated on a bi-weekly basis instead of weekly. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $195. ? 1 error where child support income was reported at an amount that was different than indicated in the file, for which there was no support. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $33. ? 1 error where general food assistance income was reported on the 50058 form when it should have been excluded. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $59. ? 1 error where there was no support for unreimbursed childcare expenses. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $150. ? 1 error where a tenant was receiving disability income but did not receive the disability deduction. This caused HAP rent to increase by $7. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (25 new admissions tested): ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was not signed until over 80 days after move-in. ? 1 error whether the inspection was not completed and passed until 8 days after move-in. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
2021-001 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Material Weakness in Internal Control Material Noncompliance Repeat finding from June 30, 2020 as Finding 2020-001 (initially reported June 30, 2010) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,100 tenants, 25 files were selected for testing. Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 1 error where the lease agreement was missing from the tenant file. ? 2 errors where it does not appear an EIV was run. ? 1 error where the utility allowance was calculated using the prior year amounts, which caused the HAP rent to increase by $11. ? 2 errors where social security income was calculated using the prior year amount when there was documentation in the file indicating the current monthly amount. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $3 in both cases. ? 1 error where wage income was calculated on a weekly basis instead of bi-weekly, which caused the HAP rent to increase by $168. ? 1 error where wage income was calculated on a bi-weekly basis instead of weekly. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $195. ? 1 error where child support income was reported at an amount that was different than indicated in the file, for which there was no support. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $33. ? 1 error where general food assistance income was reported on the 50058 form when it should have been excluded. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $59. ? 1 error where there was no support for unreimbursed childcare expenses. This caused the HAP rent to decrease by $150. ? 1 error where a tenant was receiving disability income but did not receive the disability deduction. This caused HAP rent to increase by $7. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (25 new admissions tested): ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was not signed until over 80 days after move-in. ? 1 error whether the inspection was not completed and passed until 8 days after move-in. 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. Action Taken: The Authority concurs with this finding and has implemented a robust file review process, enhanced quality control procedures, and provided training on errors noted along with annual program training for all staff. The cited files were corrected. Effective Date: June 15, 2022 Contact Information Brenda Williams, Executive Director Tallahassee Housing Authority 2940 Grady Road Tallahassee, Florida 32312 (850) 385-6126
2020-001
FAC accepted this audit on March 3, 2021 — management decision was due September 3, 2021.
Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,000 tenants, 40 files were selected for testing (but stopped testing after reviewing 20 files). Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was not signed by the Authority and the landlord. ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was missing from the tenant files. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was not signed by the Authority. ? 1 error where the lease agreement was missing from the tenant file. ? 2 errors where the lead base paint form was missing from the tenant file and the unit was built prior to 1978. ? 1 error where the dependent deduction of $480 was reported on the 50058 form when the household did not qualify for the deduction. This error decreased the HAP rent by $12. ? 1 error where there was no support for the ?other source of income? reported on the 50058 form, which could have a potential effect of increasing the HAP rent by $153. ? 1 error where the childcare income was incorrectly reported on the 50058 form and caused the HAP rent to increase by $24. ? 1 error where general food assistance income was reported on the 50058 form when it should have been excluded. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $8. ? 1 error where there was no support for wage support income reported on the 50058 form, which could have a potential effect of increasing the HAP rent by $377. ? 1 error where the signed 9886 form was missing for a member of the household who is over 18 years old. ? 1 error where the checkbox on the 214 form was not checked indicating that the tenant had eligible immigration status. Furthermore, there was no copy of the birth certificate in the tenant file to verify the tenant?s immigration status. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (24 new admissions tested): ? 1 error where the checkbox on the 214 form was not checked indicating that the household had eligible immigration status. However, based on the birth certificates, the members of the housed were all U.S. citizens. ? 1 error where a 214 form was missing from the tenant file for the head of the household, but based on the birth certificate, the head of household was a U.S. citizen. In addition, for the other members of the household, the 214 form was not checked indicating that the tenants had eligible immigration status. However, based on the birth certificates the tenants were U.S. Citizens. ? 2 errors where the 214 forms are missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the rent reasonableness form is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the lease agreement is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was signed 90 days after the tenant?s move-in date. ? 2 errors where the voucher is missing from the tenant file, but appears that the family was given the proper voucher size based on the family size and payment standard used on the 50058 form. ? 1 error where the voucher was issued for the wrong unit size. However, based on the family size reported on the 50058 form, the family was properly housed and the correct payment standard was applied. ? 1 error where the RTA was not signed by the tenant. ? 1 error where the signature page of the RTA is missing from the tenant?s file. ? 2 errors where the RTA was not signed until after the voucher expiration date. ? 1 error where the RTA is missing from the tenant?s file. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2020-001 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Material Weakness in Internal Control Material Noncompliance Repeated from prior year 2010 (see Prior Year Finding 2019-002) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,000 tenants, 40 files were selected for testing (but stopped testing after reviewing 20 files). Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was not signed by the Authority and the landlord. ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was missing from the tenant files. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was not signed by the Authority. ? 1 error where the lease agreement was missing from the tenant file. ? 2 errors where the lead base paint form was missing from the tenant file and the unit was built prior to 1978. ? 1 error where the dependent deduction of $480 was reported on the 50058 form when the household did not qualify for the deduction. This error decreased the HAP rent by $12. ? 1 error where there was no support for the ?other source of income? reported on the 50058 form, which could have a potential effect of increasing the HAP rent by $153. ? 1 error where the childcare income was incorrectly reported on the 50058 form and caused the HAP rent to increase by $24. ? 1 error where general food assistance income was reported on the 50058 form when it should have been excluded. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $8. ? 1 error where there was no support for wage support income reported on the 50058 form, which could have a potential effect of increasing the HAP rent by $377. ? 1 error where the signed 9886 form was missing for a member of the household who is over 18 years old. ? 1 error where the checkbox on the 214 form was not checked indicating that the tenant had eligible immigration status. Furthermore, there was no copy of the birth certificate in the tenant file to verify the tenant?s immigration status. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (24 new admissions tested): ? 1 error where the checkbox on the 214 form was not checked indicating that the household had eligible immigration status. However, based on the birth certificates, the members of the housed were all U.S. citizens. ? 1 error where a 214 form was missing from the tenant file for the head of the household, but based on the birth certificate, the head of household was a U.S. citizen. In addition, for the other members of the household, the 214 form was not checked indicating that the tenants had eligible immigration status. However, based on the birth certificates the tenants were U.S. Citizens. ? 2 errors where the 214 forms are missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the rent reasonableness form is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the lease agreement is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was signed 90 days after the tenant?s move-in date. ? 2 errors where the voucher is missing from the tenant file, but appears that the family was given the proper voucher size based on the family size and payment standard used on the 50058 form. ? 1 error where the voucher was issued for the wrong unit size. However, based on the family size reported on the 50058 form, the family was properly housed and the correct payment standard was applied. ? 1 error where the RTA was not signed by the tenant. ? 1 error where the signature page of the RTA is missing from the tenant?s file. ? 2 errors where the RTA was not signed until after the voucher expiration date. ? 1 error where the RTA is missing from the tenant?s file. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and will implement review procedures and provide ongoing training to staff.
2020-001 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Material Weakness in Internal Control Material Noncompliance Repeated from prior year 2010 (see Prior Year Finding 2019-002) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,000 tenants, 40 files were selected for testing (but stopped testing after reviewing 20 files). Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was not signed by the Authority and the landlord. ? 3 errors where the HAP contract was missing from the tenant files. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was not signed by the Authority. ? 1 error where the lease agreement was missing from the tenant file. ? 2 errors where the lead base paint form was missing from the tenant file and the unit was built prior to 1978. ? 1 error where the dependent deduction of $480 was reported on the 50058 form when the household did not qualify for the deduction. This error decreased the HAP rent by $12. ? 1 error where there was no support for the ?other source of income? reported on the 50058 form, which could have a potential effect of increasing the HAP rent by $153. ? 1 error where the childcare income was incorrectly reported on the 50058 form and caused the HAP rent to increase by $24. ? 1 error where general food assistance income was reported on the 50058 form when it should have been excluded. This caused the HAP rent to increase by $8. ? 1 error where there was no support for wage support income reported on the 50058 form, which could have a potential effect of increasing the HAP rent by $377. ? 1 error where the signed 9886 form was missing for a member of the household who is over 18 years old. ? 1 error where the checkbox on the 214 form was not checked indicating that the tenant had eligible immigration status. Furthermore, there was no copy of the birth certificate in the tenant file to verify the tenant?s immigration status. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (24 new admissions tested): ? 1 error where the checkbox on the 214 form was not checked indicating that the household had eligible immigration status. However, based on the birth certificates, the members of the housed were all U.S. citizens. ? 1 error where a 214 form was missing from the tenant file for the head of the household, but based on the birth certificate, the head of household was a U.S. citizen. In addition, for the other members of the household, the 214 form was not checked indicating that the tenants had eligible immigration status. However, based on the birth certificates the tenants were U.S. Citizens. ? 2 errors where the 214 forms are missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the rent reasonableness form is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the lease agreement is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract is missing from the tenant file. ? 1 error where the HAP contract was signed 90 days after the tenant?s move-in date. ? 2 errors where the voucher is missing from the tenant file, but appears that the family was given the proper voucher size based on the family size and payment standard used on the 50058 form. ? 1 error where the voucher was issued for the wrong unit size. However, based on the family size reported on the 50058 form, the family was properly housed and the correct payment standard was applied. ? 1 error where the RTA was not signed by the tenant. ? 1 error where the signature page of the RTA is missing from the tenant?s file. ? 2 errors where the RTA was not signed until after the voucher expiration date. ? 1 error where the RTA is missing from the tenant?s file. 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. Action Taken: The Authority concurs with this finding and has implemented a robust file review process, enhanced quality control procedures, and provided training on errors noted along with annual program training for all staff. The cited files were corrected.
2019-002
There is no support that quality control inspections were performed for the 2020 fiscal year. Per 24 CFR 982.405(b), the Authority is required to perform quality control inspections for the 2020 fiscal year. Criteria: The PHA must inspect the unit leased to a family at least annually to determine if the unit meets Housing Quality Standards (HQS) and the PHA must conduct quality control re-inspections. The PHA must prepare a unit inspection report (24 CFR sections 982.158(d) and 982.405(b)). Questioned Costs: None. Effect: The Authority is not in compliance with applicable regulations regarding quality control inspections and there is no assurance that inspectors are completing the inspections properly. Cause The Authority did not have adequate internal controls in place over Housing Quality Standards Inspections. Recommendation The Authority should increase training to its staff to ensure that the Authority is in compliance with HUD rules and regulations by assuring Housing Quality Standards Inspections are being performed timely and maintaining proper records. Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee We concur with the recommendation. The Authority is now assuring Housing Quality Standards Inspections and HQS Enforcement are being performed timely and maintaining proper documentation.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2020-002 Housing Quality Standards Inspections Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Condition: There is no support that quality control inspections were performed for the 2020 fiscal year. Per 24 CFR 982.405(b), the Authority is required to perform quality control inspections for the 2020 fiscal year. Criteria: The PHA must inspect the unit leased to a family at least annually to determine if the unit meets Housing Quality Standards (HQS) and the PHA must conduct quality control re-inspections. The PHA must prepare a unit inspection report (24 CFR sections 982.158(d) and 982.405(b)). Questioned Costs: None. Effect: The Authority is not in compliance with applicable regulations regarding quality control inspections and there is no assurance that inspectors are completing the inspections properly. Cause The Authority did not have adequate internal controls in place over Housing Quality Standards Inspections. Recommendation The Authority should increase training to its staff to ensure that the Authority is in compliance with HUD rules and regulations by assuring Housing Quality Standards Inspections are being performed timely and maintaining proper records. Views of Responsible Officials of the Auditee We concur with the recommendation. The Authority is now assuring Housing Quality Standards Inspections and HQS Enforcement are being performed timely and maintaining proper documentation.
2020-002 Housing Quality Standards Inspections Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Other Matter to be Reported Under the Uniform Guidance Condition: There is no support that quality control inspections were performed for the 2020 fiscal year. Per 24 CFR 982.405(b), the Authority is required to perform quality control inspections for the 2020 fiscal year. Recommendation The Authority should increase training to its staff to ensure that the Authority is in compliance with HUD rules and regulations by assuring Housing Quality Standards Inspections are being performed timely and maintaining proper records. Action Taken: The Authority concurs with this finding. The Authority is now assuring Housing Quality Standard Inspections are being performed timely and maintaining proper documentation.
FAC accepted this audit on April 8, 2020 — management decision was due October 8, 2020.
Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,000 tenants, 40 files were selected for testing (but stopped testing after reviewing 25 files). Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 5 miscalculated income errors that caused the HAP rent to change. ? 2 errors where there was no support for the tenant?s reported income. ? 1 utility allowance error that did not change the HAP rent. ? 1 $400 deduction error that did not cause the HAP rent to change. ? 1 $480 deduction error that caused the HAP rent to change. ? 1 error where there was no support for the tenant?s unreimbursed childcare costs that was reported on the 50058. ? 1 error for a missing EIV report. ? 1 error for a missing signed 214 form for the tenant?s household, but all household members are U.S. Citizens. ? 1 error for a missing signed 214 form and birth certificate for a member of the household who is over 18 years old. ? 1 error for a missing HAP contract ? 1 error for a missing lease agreement. ? 1 error had a missing lead paint form. ? 1 error for a missing 9886 form. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (24 new admissions tested): ? 1 tenant file had a missing signed 214 form for the tenant?s household, but all household members are U.S. Citizens. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and has implemented a robust file review process, enhanced quality control procedures, and provided training on errors noted along with annual program training for all staff. The cited files were corrected.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴2019-002 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Material Weakness in Internal Control Material Noncompliance Repeated from prior year 2010 (see Prior Year Finding 2018-002) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,000 tenants, 40 files were selected for testing (but stopped testing after reviewing 25 files). Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 5 miscalculated income errors that caused the HAP rent to change. ? 2 errors where there was no support for the tenant?s reported income. ? 1 utility allowance error that did not change the HAP rent. ? 1 $400 deduction error that did not cause the HAP rent to change. ? 1 $480 deduction error that caused the HAP rent to change. ? 1 error where there was no support for the tenant?s unreimbursed childcare costs that was reported on the 50058. ? 1 error for a missing EIV report. ? 1 error for a missing signed 214 form for the tenant?s household, but all household members are U.S. Citizens. ? 1 error for a missing signed 214 form and birth certificate for a member of the household who is over 18 years old. ? 1 error for a missing HAP contract ? 1 error for a missing lease agreement. ? 1 error had a missing lead paint form. ? 1 error for a missing 9886 form. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (24 new admissions tested): ? 1 tenant file had a missing signed 214 form for the tenant?s household, but all household members are U.S. Citizens. Criteria: 24 CFR 982.516 requires internal controls to be in place to ensure compliance with HUD requirements, as well as maintain 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 recertifications, 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 fully implemented. 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 and has implemented a robust file review process, enhanced quality control procedures, and provided training on errors noted along with annual program training for all staff. The cited files were corrected.
2019-002 Eligibility ? Tenant Files Section 8 Housing Voucher Cluster (Section 8): 14.871 Section 8 ? Housing Choice Vouchers 14.879 Mainstream Vouchers Material Weakness in Internal Control Material Noncompliance Repeated from prior year 2010 (see Prior Year Finding 2018-002) Condition: Out of a total tenant population of approximately 2,000 tenants, 40 files were selected for testing (but stopped testing after reviewing 25 files). Exceptions were noted as follows: ? 5 miscalculated income errors that caused the HAP rent to change. ? 2 errors where there was no support for the tenant?s reported income. ? 1 utility allowance error that did not change the HAP rent. ? 1 $400 deduction error that did not cause the HAP rent to change. ? 1 $480 deduction error that caused the HAP rent to change. ? 1 error where there was no support for the tenant?s unreimbursed childcare costs that was reported on the 50058. ? 1 error for a missing EIV report. ? 1 error for a missing signed 214 form for the tenant?s household, but all household members are U.S. Citizens. ? 1 error for a missing signed 214 form and birth certificate for a member of the household who is over 18 years old. ? 1 error for a missing HAP contract ? 1 error for a missing lease agreement. ? 1 error had a missing lead paint form. ? 1 error for a missing 9886 form. In addition to the above, we noted the following during our new admissions testing (24 new admissions tested): ? 1 tenant file had a missing signed 214 form for the tenant?s household, but all household members are U.S. Citizens. 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. Action Taken: The Authority concurs with this finding and has implemented a robust file review process, enhanced quality control procedures, and provided training on errors noted along with annual program training for all staff. The cited files were corrected. Effective Date: April 8, 2020 Contact Information Brenda Williams, Executive Director Tallahassee Housing Authority 2940 Grady Road Tallahassee, Florida 32312 (850) 385-6126
2018-002
FAC accepted this audit on March 26, 2019 — management decision was due September 26, 2019.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2017-002
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2017-003
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
FAC accepted this audit on March 26, 2018 — management decision was due September 26, 2018.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-003
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-005
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-007
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
FAC accepted this audit on March 28, 2017 — management decision was due September 28, 2017.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-001
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-002
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-003
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-004
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.