TR-2016-38 APPT CHRIS QUATRONE HOUSING COMM OPP
7 7M3
The Honorable Richard Cohen, Mayor
Town of Agawam
36 Main Street
Agawam, MA 01001
Mr. Mayor:
I truly appreciate being nominated to serve on the
Agawam Housing Committee. Due to recent
commitments I am unable to serve on the Agawam
Housing Committee at this time. Please withdraw m
name from nomination.
I truly appreciate your consideration.
Very truly yours
DL
Chris Quatrone
air
w Cam,! .ems:
6.:
h
TR=2016.38
A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE APPOINTMENT OF
CHRIS QUATRONE, 12 HASKELL STREET, AGAWAM, MA
TO THE AGAWAM HOUSING COMMITTEE TO A TERM EXPIRING
MAY 31,2018
WHEREAS,a-vacancy exists on the Agawam Housing Committee,and
WHEREAS, the Meer has appointed Chris Quatrone 12 Haskell
Street,Agawam, MA to the Agawam Housing Committee to a term expiring on May 81, 2018
and
NOW THEREFORE, THE AGAWAM TOWN COUNCIL hereby resolves to confirm the
appointment of Chris Quatrone, 12 Haskell Street, Agawam, MA to the Agawam Housing
Committee to-a term expiring May 31, 2018
GATED THIS DAY OF - - 2016.
PER ORDER OF THE AGAWAM TOWN COUNCIL
,lames Cichetti,President,Agawam Town Council
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
�N
Patrick Toney,Town Solicitor
The Honorable Richard Cohen, Mayor
Town of Agawam
36 Main Street
Agawam, MA 01001
Mayor Cohen:
Please be advised that I am submitting my name into
nomination to be appointed a member of the Agawam Housing
Committee. It would be my honor and pleasure to serve The
Town of Agawam in this capacity.
If you should happen to have any questions please don't
hesitate to contact me.
X = C4
Very truly-Y.Ours,
X-
Chris QU�Qe
12 Haskell Street
Agawam, MA 01001
ti
a
AUDITOR OF THE COMMONWEALTH'
ONE ASHBURTON PLACE,ROOM 1819
BOSTON,MASSACHUSE'ITS 02108
A.JOSEPH DeNUCCI TEL.(617)727-6200'
AUDITOR;
NO. 2007-0595-3A
INDEPENDENT STATE AUDITOR'S REPORT ON
CERTAIN ACTIVITIES OF THE
AGAWAM HOUSING AUTHORITY
OCTOBER 1,2004 TO DECEMBER 31 2006
OFFICIAL AUDIT'
REPORT
SEPTEMBER 27, 2007
2007-0595-3A TABLE OF CONTENTS/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with Chapter 11, Section 12, of the Massachusetts General "ws, we
conducted in audit of certain activities of the Agawam Housing Authority for the period
October 1, 2004 to December 31, 2006. The objectives of our audit were to assess the
adequacy of the Authoritys management control system for measuring, reporting, and
monitoring the effectiveness of its programs, and to evaluate its compliance with laws, rules,
and regulations applicable to each program. Based uthat 'If pon.our-rewew.we hiviconcluacci -
the Authority did not maintain adequate management controls or comply with certain laws
and iegWadons, which resulted in inappropriate expenditures.-uneconomical practices, and
gi,erWmanagement of its,housing programs during the 27-month period ended December
,31'V2006.
AUDIT RESULTS 4
1. RESULTS OF INSPECTIONS—NONCOMPLIANCE WITH STATE SANITARY CODE 4
The Department of Housing and Community Developmenes (DHCD) Property
Maintenance Guide, Chapter 3(F), requires that inspections of dwelling units be
conducted annually and upon each vacancy to ensure that every dwelling unit conforms
to minimum standards for safe,decent, and sanitary housing as set forth in Chapter 11 of
the State Sanitary Code.
kA.DHCD,report dated Septerfiber 30, 2005 disclosed that 42 randomly selected housing--/
units failed inspection. 'A follow-up report dated June 27, 2006,noted that very little
�-P -iii s- had been. ifi addressin -g the humero -Is' ihd safety-fety P,
i violations cited in 'hMPrip; Mr of;he s 4 units ame � alhealth a
gam' F=ailecdi m' specti6fif Our March 28,
2007 inspection of she housing units at the Authofityi-100 Development at Brady Village
noted 13 instances of noncompliance with Chapter II of the Sanitary Code, including
missing baseboard heat covers, crumbling walls, water staid on walls. and ceilings,
cracked electric switch plate covers, missing smoke detectors, broken seals on windows,
and missing stair handrails. In its response, the Authority stated that it has applied for
and received over $1.5 million in the last eight months from D14CD for emergency
capital improvements for interior and exterior work. In addition, the Authoritys Board
of Directors has adopted policies that require annual inspection of an units.
2. IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED REGARDING VACANCY TURNAROUND TIME 6
Our review of the Authority's -vacant unit turnaround time disclosed that the Authority
encountered excessive delays in preparing vacated apartments for occupancy and may
have lost the opportunity to earn approximately $57,287 in potential rental income.
Specifically, it took the Authority an average of 155 days to prepare and fill the vacant
units,well beyond the recommended 21 days as defined by the Department of Housing
and Community Development HCD) guidelines. There were 47 its with excessive
vacancies during the audit period October 1,2004 to December 31,2006, and 17 (36%)
of those units still required refurbishment, One unit has been vacant for over two years
and six units have been vacant for over one year. In its response, the Authority stated
t 2007-0595-3A TABLE OF CONTENTS/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY`
a
that it has implemented procedures to ensure that all vacant units are.occupied within
DHCD's 21-day time frame. Currently, all Program 667 units are occupied, all Program
705 units are occupied, and 17 units of Program 200 are awaiting renovations, for which
DHCD has provided funding.
3. CONTROLS OVER TENANT ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE BALANCES NEED
STRENGTHENING 8'
A review of the Authority's fiscal year 2006 financial statements revealed a tenant
accounts receivable balance of $63,935 as of September 30, 2006. A detailed review of
the balances revealed that the Authority did not actively monitor amounts due from
tenants and may have experienced revenue losses as a result of inaccurate receivable
balances. The inaccuracies in the balances were due, in part, to incorrect tenant rent-
determinations and improper postings; to the Authority's rent rolls. (See Audit Result;
No. 9 for further details.) Also, our review of Board minutes revealed that there was no
Board approval and no entry on the books of account for the tenant accounts;receivable
write-offs, totaling'$31,042. In its response, the Authority stated that it has adopted and:
is complying with an aggressive rent collection policy.
4. OPERATING RESERVES SIGNIFICANTLY 'BELOW THE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED
LEVEL 10
Our review'disclosed that the Authority's operating reserve was:significantly below the
minimum level recommended by DHCD. Moreover, we determined that the Board
approved numerous questionable payments (see Audit Results Nos. 6, 7,and 11) and did
not fulfill its fiduciary responsibilities to provide adequate oversight of Authority
operations. As a result, the Authority may not have the financial resources necessary to
fund; emergency situations or maintain the current level of services provided. In its
response, the Authority concurred that the prior Board did not fulfill its fiduciary
responsibility for the overall proper"administration of the Authority by establishing
policies and guidelines and indicated that it expects to end this fiscal year with a reserve
balance of $121,000, which is the suggested minimal level required by DHCD. The
Authority further indicated that in the future, the Board will take an active role in
providing oversight.
S. INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER PAYROLL 12
Our review`disclosed that the Authority was operating without a personnel policy and
neither the administrative staff nor the Executive Director prepared weekly timesheets.
In addition, the system used to track employee leave balances does not meet DHCD`
standards. The Authority used post-it notes to track hours worked for each employee'
rather than a formal attendance report. We also noted that the Authority paid two
administrative staff employees for compensatory time,even though administrative staff is
prohibited from accruing compensatory time without the proper approval from DHCD:
The two administrative staff employees received compensatory time payments of $5,424
in February of 2006 and$2,118 in October 2006. In its response, the Authority indicated
that the approval of various policies and procedures now enables the Authority to have
oversight control over its payroll records by (1) requiring that employee attendance
records be prepared, reviewed, and approved in a timely manner, including those of the
Executive Director; and (2) ensuring that all employee time records and accrued benefit
ii
2007-0595-3A TABLE OF CONTENTS/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
records are adequately documented to substantiate employee work hours and leave
balances for each pay period.
6., QUESTIONABLE PAYMENTS TOTALING IN EXCESS OF$8,000 14'
Our review of Authority records revealed over $8,000 in questionable 'payments
associated with a former administrative employee. These payments included $2,900 for,
outside attorney services, $3,375 for a psychological evaluation of the former employee,
and $1,727 for wages and accrued sick leave. These payments were not approved by
DHCD, and the$1,727 in wages was in excess of what the former employee was entitled
to based on;available documentation.
In its response, the Authority'stated that neither the current Executive Director nor
Board of Commissioners was involved in this prolonged personnel dispute that resulted
in an administrative employee's resignation and the subsequent payments made. The
current Executive= Director and Board of Commissioners understand that any such
exposure for the Authority needs to be assigned to DHCD's risk management program
to assess potential litigation and provide assistance and resources in order to protect both
the Authority's and the Commonwealth's interest.
7. QUESTIONABLE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT CONTRACT° 16'
The Authority entered into a management consultant contract, dated December 1, 2000
with the former Springfield Housing Authority's Director of Leased Housing for
professional services rendered in the performance of rent re-evaluations of the
Authority's 242 residents for fiscal year 2001 The initial $15,000 contract was approved
by DHCD with an expiration date of May 1, 2001. Following the contract's expirations,
the Authority continued to pay for these consultant services, at the rate of$50 per hour,
without undertaking another procurement process or seeking alternate bids. The
Authority did not seek or receive DHCD's approval for the contract extension
therefore,the contract was invalid. During the period April 1,2004 to May 30,-2005,;the
Authority paid this consultant approximately$18,100 (we were not able to determine the
exact amount because of missing invoices). The Authority ceased payments to this
consultant after DHCD's May 2005 on-site review found them to be questionable. In its
response, the Authority stated that the current Executive Director and Board of
Commissioners were not involved in the decisions to enter into the management
consultant Contract, and;that the Board has adopted a DHCD-approved procurement
policy for the Authority. This policy ensures that all procurement services are performed
according to Chapter 30B of the General Laws and DHCD`regulations.
S. NONCOMPLIANCE WITH TENANT SELECTION PROCEDURES 17
Our audit; revealed that the Authority's tenant selection procedures were not; in
compliance- with DHCD policies and regulations. Tenant applications, leases, and
waiting lists were neither properly -handled nor maintained. Consequently, eligible
applicants may have been denied or delayed housing assistance. In its response, the
Authority stated that it has purchased software that allows total control and will ensure
the properly ordered placement of housing applicants in addition to providing a system
of checks and balances. The Authority's Master and Waiting List Ledgers are now up to
date and in accordance with DHCD requirements.
'III
E 2007-0595-3A TABLE OF CONTENTS/IXECUTIVE SUMMARY
9. RENT DETERMINATION DEFICIENCIES 20
Our review of 25 tenant files noted that 15`tenants were charged incorrect rents based on
insufficient documentation of income and deductions claimed by tenants. In its response,
the Authority stated that the purchase of new software has allowed the Authority to gain
control over all aspects of tenant selections as well as rent determination. The Authority
has re-organized tenants'physical documentation in accordance with the new system.
10. IMPROPER STORAGE OF CRIMINAL OFFENDER RECORD INFORMATION (CORI) 21
Our review noted that the Authority had haphazardly stored CORI information in the
basement of the Agawam Senior Center, thereby violating the confidentiality of
information received as well as the Authority's own CORI policy, which requires that
CORI information be separate, locked, accessible only to authorized individuals, and
destroyed after the applicant is accepted into the housing program or three years from
the date of the applicant's rejection.- In its response, the Authority indicated it has
adopted policies to provide for the proper handling of CORI information.
11.rQUESTIONABLEUSE OF AUTHORITY ASSETS AND FUNDS f' 22
Our audit revealed that the Authority experienced a steady and significant decline in its
financial position as a result of poor administrative decisions,trade by its Board of
Directors, which has not fulfilled its'fiduciary responsibilities of adequately monitoring
and reviewing Authority operations. Specifically, we noted: a)-high personal usage of
Authority.cell phones;-b) questionable_gasoline card purchases, and c) inappropriate,
unallowable, or inadequately supported expenditures of Authority,funds. In its response,
the Authority stated that the present- Board not only understands its fiduciary'
responsibility for the overall proper administration of the Authority, but also realizes the
importance of policies and guidelines' to prevent such activities from happening again.
The Authority further indicated that the present Executive Director has wonted closely
with DHCD not only to develop policies but also checks and balances to ensure that any
improper activities will be addressed immediately. The Board will take an active role in
monitoring the performance of these policies and guidelines.
12. INADEQUATE INVENTORY CONTROLS 26
Our ;audit revealed that the Authority needs to strengthen its internal controls over
furniture,equipment,tools,and supplies. We noted that it does not have policies in place
regarding the addition or deletion of assets from its inventory listing. Specifically, our
tests of the inventory list noted that the locations`of assets were not reflected in the;
Authority's documentation, three of nine items did not have property identification tags,;
one item could not be located, and another had been sold according to a maintenance
staff person; however, it still appeared on the listing. We also noted that the Authority
does not conduct an annual physical inventory, and the last adjustment to its inventory
listing was October 2004. In its response, the Authority stated that with the closing of
the current fiscal year it will conduct a complete physical count of property and assets
and record location, condition, and value. In addition, prior records will be reviewed to
try and determine what items are missing or unaccounted for.
iv
2007-0595-3A TABLE OF CONTENTS/EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
13. PET SECURITY DEPOSITS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH DHCD REGULATIONS 28'
Our review of the Authority's pet policy indicated that the policy has not been approved
by DHCD and is not in compliance with DHCD regulations. The Authority does not
provide the activity or the interest earned by the pet security deposit account to each
tenant. In its response, the Authority stated that the Board has adopted a DHCD
approved pet policy for aU elderly/handicapped housing. The policy is consistent with
and reflects all requirements of Chapter 151 and the Acts of 1989. In addition, interest
has been calculated and returned to the tenants as best as could be determined.
APPENDIX I 30
STATE SANITARY CODE NONCOMPLIANCE NOTED 30
APPENDIX II 31
PHOTOGRAPHS OF CONDITIONS FOUND 31
v'
+ 2007-0595-3A- INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Background
The Agawam Housing Authority manages 242 units in three state-aided'housing programs. The
Authority's staff consists of an Executive Director, three full-time administrative staff, and three
full-time maintenance staff. Our audit, covering the period October 1, 2004 to December 31, 2006,
found a complete breakdown in internal accounting and administrative controls at the Authority.
Conditions had significantly deteriorated since our prior audit, and if not improved will continue to
undermine the financial stability and solvency of the Authority. The extent of the Authority's
problems was unknown until the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD)
issued a Special Scope Review Report dated October 31, 2005. DHCD's review identified a number
of policy, maintenance, and programmatic deficiencies among the Authority's administrative
practices and housing program management. Significant DHCD Findings included:
• Missing fundamental policies, including by-laws and management,; personnel, and
procurement policies.
•` Informal administrative practices, such as personnel records management, that negatively
impacted the finances of the Authority. The Authority could not accurately account for
vacation and personnel leave accrual or sufficiently track overtime costs due to inadequate
personnel records.
• Undeveloped capital and preventive maintenance policies that contributed to health and
safety violations and insufficient property maintenance.
• Operating reserves were not spent in the most;effective manner because the Authority did
not have comprehensive maintenance plans.
• Instances of improper tenant selection, income documentation, and violations of Criminal
Offender Record Information (CORI) regulations.
Our audit found that many records were missing,and records that were available—such as those for
tenants, payroll expenditures, bank accounts, checkbooks, check registers, and inventory..—were
incomplete, inconsistent, or improperly maintained, indicating questionable practices and serious
income-:reporting, legal, and accountability issues for the Authority. The Authority must recognize;
that it is responsible for its financial and physical condition and the safety and security of its tenants
and employees. It is the responsibility of Authority management, not auditors, to manage, prepare,,
1
2007-0595-3A INTRODUCTION
maintain, and correct books and records. The responsibility of auditors is to verify whether
management's;representations in its books and records are reliable,complete,and accurate.
According to generally accepted government auditing standards (GAO-03-673G Chapter 1, Roles
and Responsibilities),management must establish and maintain internal controls,as follows:
OlAcials of the audited entity(for example, managers of a state or local governmental entity or a
nonprofit entity that receives federal awards)are responsible for...establishing and maintaining
effective internal conbols'to help ensure that appropriate goals and objectives are met;resources
are used effidendy, economically, and eh`ecbvely, and are safeguarded;laws and regulations are
foliowed,and reliable data are obtained, maintained, and fairly discloser,.
With the cooperation of the current Executive'Director (hired in January 2007), Board Chairmen,
and Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) officials, we identified many
serious and significant internal control, financial, accounting, and management weaknesses that
continued to arise throughout our audit. The current Executive Director and Board Members have
subsequently addressed many of those issues by initiating remedial action decisively and deliberately.
Audit Swpe, Obieedve4 and Methodology
In accordance with Chapter 11, Section 12, of the Massachusetts General Laws, we conducted an
audit of certain activities of the Agawam Housing Authority for the period October 1, 2004 to
December 31, 2006, The objectives of our audit were to (1) assess the adequacy of the Authority's
management control system for measuring, reporting, and monitoring the effectiveness of its
programs, and (2) evaluate the Authority's compliance with laws,rules, and regulations applicable to
each program. y`
Our audit was conducted in accordance with applicable generally accepted government auditing
standards for performance audits and, accordingly, included audit tests and procedures that we
considered necessary.
r
To achieve our;audit objectives,we reviewed the following,
• Tenant-selection procedures to verify that tenants were selected in accordance with DHCD
regulations.
•' Vacancy records to determine whether the Authority adhered to DHCD procedures for
preparing and filling vacant housing units.
2
2007-0595-3A INTRODUCTION
• Annual rent-determination procedures to verify that rents were calculated properly and in
accordance with DHCD regulations.
• Accounts receivable procedures to ensure that rent collections were timely and uncollectible
tenant accounts receivable balances were written off properly.
• Site-inspection procedures and records to verify compliance with DHCD inspection
requirements and ensure that selected housing units were in safe and sanitary condition,:
• Procedures for making payments to employees for salaries, travel,and fringe benefits to verify
compliance with established rules and regulations.
• Property and equipment inventory-control procedures to determine whether the Authority
properly'protected and maintained its resources in compliance with DHCD requirements.
•` Contract-procurement procedures and records to verify compliance with public bidding laws
and DHCD requirements for awarding contracts.
• Cash-management and investment policies and practices to verify that the Authority
maximized its interest income and its deposits were fully insured.
• DHCD-approved operating budgets for the fiscal year in comparison with actual expenditures
to determine whether line item and total amounts by housing program were within budgetary
limits and whether required fiscal reports were submitted to DHCD in a complete,accurate,
and timely manner.
• Operating reserve accounts to verify whether the Authority's reserves fell within DHCD's
provisions for maximum and minimum allowable amounts and to assess the level of need for
operating subsidies to determine whether the amount earned was consistent with the amount
received from DHCD,
•` Modernization awards to verify that contracts were awarded properly and funds were received'
and disbursed in accordance with the contracts,and to determine the existence of any excess
funds.
• DHCD's Special Scope Review dated October 31, 2005.
Based on our review, we have concluded that the Authority did not maintain adequate management
controls or comply with certain laws and regulations, which resulted in inappropriate expenditures,
uneconomical practices, and the mismanagement of its housing programs; during the 27-month
period ended December 31,2006.
r
3
2007-0595-3A AUD1T RESULTS
AUDIT RESULTS
1. REESSULT&OF-INSPECTIONS_-NONCOMPLIANCEs+WITH,STATE>SANITARY.CODE_ .
The Department of Housing and Community Development's (DHCD) Property Maintenance
Guide,Chapter 3(F), requires that inspections of dwelling units be conducted annually and upon;
each vacancy to ensure that every dwelling unit conforms to minimum standards for safe,
decent,and sanitary housing as set forth in Chapter H of the State Sanitary Code.
A DHCD ;report dated September 30 2005;disclosed that 42 out of 242 units were randomly
selected and failed inspection. A fallow-up report dated June 27, 2006 noted that very little
progress had been made in addressing the numerous health and safety violations cited in the
prior report; in fact, 38 of the same 42 units again failed inspection. 'Violations of either-the>
health and safety standards or lease agreement included:
• Missing handrails in basement stairwells
• Open attic hatches between units
• Hot water exceeding safe temperatures
• Hazardous clothes dryer installation
• -Broken basement windows:
• Missing electrical connectors under garbage disposals
• Imperative emergency lighting;
• Faulty or inoperative windows in living areas
• Hazardous and illegal bedrooms in basements
• Kissing smoke detectors
• Flammables stored near furnaces
• Tenant's belongings blocking means of egress
• Excessive unit clutter
• Unapproved pets
4
2007-0595-3A ALJDIT RESULTS
Annual unit inspections are an important aspect of property maintenance. During annual
inspections, authorities can assess it conditions, lease compliance under 760 CMR 6.06, and
generate work orders. DHCD requires authorities to keep annual inspection reports on file;
however, annual inspection reports could not be located in the Authority's files. Authority
personnel informed us that annual inspections had not been performed in the last several years.
Our Match 28, 2007 inspection of six housing units at the Authotity's 200 Development at
Brady Village noted 13 instances of noncompliance with Chapter It of the Sanitary Code,
including missing baseboard heat covers, crumbling walls, water stains on walls and ceilings,
cracked electric switch plate covers, missing smoke detectors, broken seals on windows, and
missing stair handrails. We noted that the inspected units have been vacant for long periods of
time,and none of these problems have been addressed,
U n ft-# Date Unit Vacated
5D Brady Village January 7,2006
113 Brady Village Authority could not provide date
2D Brady Village May 3, 2006
3B Brady Village November 30,2005
8A Brady Village Authority could not provide date
11 C Brady V&age October 31,2006
,,Pes-0 ese long-standing'co lii6ns, the-former executive Director responded to our survey
questionnaire and claimed that the Agawam Housing Authority had no units that needed
modernization funds) DHCD granted two site improvement awards totaling $44,000 to the
Authority in December 2002 for the purpose of upgrading lighting, fencing,, and landscaping at
the Brady Village Development- The Authority never responded to DHCD's,award letter with a
required project plan, and an August 20, 2003 reminder letter was sent, which included
directions on how the Authority could access the funds after drafting and receiving DHCD
5
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS'
approval for its project plan. Once again, the Authority did not take the actions necessary to
obtain the much needed improvement funds.
The photographs presented in Appendix H ;illustrate the need to address the conditions noted,
since eligible persons have long been denied housing in these units and the Authority's loss of
potential income has had a detrimental effect on; operating reserves. Also, postponing the
necessary improvements would require greater costs at a future date and may result in the
properties not conforming to minimum standards for safe,decent,and sanitary housing.
Re�vmmendativn
The Authority should apply for funding from DHCD to address the issues noted during our
inspections of the interior (dwelling units) and exterior (buildings) of the Authority, as well as
other issues that need to be addressed. Moreover, DHCD'should obtain and provide sufficient
funds to the Authority in a timely manner so that it may provide safe, decent, and sanitary
housing for its tenants.
Additionally, the Authority must ensure that:it conducts annual inspections of all housing units
and maintains copies of the related inspection reports in its files. The annual inspections should
be used by the Authority to assess unit conditions,lease compliance, and generate work orders
as necessary.
Audifee's Response'
The Authority has applied for and revived over the last eight months from DHCD over
1.5 million for emergency capital improvements for interior and exterior work At present
die Autrronly ;continues to partner with DHCD to provide safe, decent and sanitary
housing for its tenants In<addWon the Authon'ly's Boald of Directors have adopted'
policies that require annual Inspectton of all units. These inspections`will help Identify'
possible potential problems' and ensure lease compliances. Copies of the annual'
inspections will be kept in our files.
2. IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED REGARDING VACANCY TURNAROUND TIME
Our review of the Authority's vacant unit turnaround time disclosed that the Authority had
excessive delays in preparing vacated apartments for occupancy and may have lost the
opportunity to earn approximately$57,287 in potential rental income because it did not prepare
and fill units on a timely basis. Specifically, it took the Authority an average of 155 days to°
prepare and fill the vacant units, well beyond the recommended 21 days, as defined by the
Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) guidelines for maintenance.
6
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
There were 47 units with excessive vacancies during the audit period October 1, 2004 to
December 31,2006. Six is have been vacant for over a year and one it has been vacant for
over two years. Also, 22 vacant units filled by,the Authority took an average of 25 additional
days to be reoccupied from the date they were ready for occupancy. As of March 31, 2006, 17
(36%) of the 47 units still required refurbishment. Details of the vacancies are as follows.
I_oW_Days Days in Excess o _L21g gf Potential
Pro ram No.of Units VqqaLt DHCD Guidelines Rental lncQM
667 40 5,930 5,090 $42,960
200 6 1,611 1,485 11,137
751 -27 1 —=2 2.120
Total 4z Kz=
DHCD-'s Property Maintenance Guide,Chapter 1,states,in put
One primary responsibility of your LHA[local Housing Authority]is to reoccupy vacancies as fast
as p=ible. Every day a unit is vacant Is a day of rent lost. Vacandes also invite vandalism and
signal trouble if Mey linger. it is particularly lmportan4 therefore, to have vacancy refurbishment'
as a high prionty In the assignment of work bo your staff Since this work does not have an
"advocate 0(e.g. an occupant asking for the work to be done), it can be easy to abandon work In
progress on a vacancy when other residents make maintenance requests. This must be resisted
One of the ways to do this is to haw someone on your LHA staff be the insistent voice reminding
ewryone of the importance of compleb(ng the vacancy works .........
DHCD beheves a reasonable outsde limit for turning around vacancies Is 21 working days where
notice has beengivers The maintenance porton of the vacancy process should not,take longer
than 14 days DHCD requires your vacancy ledger to document the reasom for vacancy periods
Of 1017 n 21 dapT.
By not complying with DHCD's 21-day unit turnaround requirement and not maintaining
accurate waiting lists, the Authority has adversely affected its overall financial condition and
delayed state subsidized housing for its elderly and family applicants. (See Audit Result No. 8.)
Rftvmmendatfon
The Authority should implement procedures to ensure that all vacant units are occupied within
DHCD"s 21-day timeframe to provide housing to eligible applicants in a timely manner and to
cam much needed additional revenue.
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
A uditee's Response
The Auftnty has Implemented procedures to ensure that all vacant units are occupied
within DHCD87 21 day time fiame At present, all Program 667 units are occupied, all
Prograrn 705 units are occupied and 17 units of Program 200 are presently awaiting
renovations, for which DHC9 has provided funding It should also be noted that dunng
[j the audited period, DHG9 had froze the Authority's ability to rent units due to the
findings contained in fffielrj scope audit dated September 30, 2005 Current vacancies
are as follows.,
Percent of Percent of Dev.Vac.
Dev.I.D. Dev.Name Occupied Total Occupied Vacant Total Vacant Percentage
200-1 Brady Village 27 12.11% 17* 85-00% 62-96%
667-1 Country View 40 17.946/6 0 0.00% 0.00%
667-2 Colonial Haven 52 23.32% 0 0,00% 0.00%
667-3 Meadowbrook Mnr 64 28.70% 0 0.00% 0.00%
667-4 Danahy Schoolhse 33 14.80% 3" 15.00% 9.09%
705-1 Wade Village 7 3,141/6 0 0.00% 0.00%
Totals 223 100.00% 20 100.00% 8.97%
*Units awaiting rehabilitation
**Congregate Uhity
3. CONTROLS OVER TENANT ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE BALANCES NEED STRENGTHENING
The Authority's fiscal year 2006 financial statements revealed a growing increase in its tenant
accounts receivable balance from $24,077 in fiscal year 2004 to $63,935 as of September 30,
2006. We noted that the Authority did not actively monitor amounts due from tenants and may
have experienced revenue losses as a result of inaccurate receivable balances. The inaccuracies in
the tenant accounts receivable balances were due, in part, to incorrect rent determinations and
improper postings to the Authority's rent tolls. (See Audit Result No. 9 for further details)
Also,our review of Board minutes revealed that there was no Board approval of tenant accounts
receivable write-offs,totaling$31,042.
The tenant accounts receivable balances and write-offs were made without Board approval.
However, they were reflected on the Authority's financial statements, as follows:
Fiscal Year Tenants Amount
Ended Receivable Write-offs
9/30/04 $24,077 $ 3,007
9/30/05 $34,550 $10,569
9/30/06 $63,935
9/30/07
(thru 3/07) $43,367 317-466
8
2007-0595-3A AUDFr RESULTS
DHCD's Accounting Manual for State-Aided Housing Programs, effective June 30, 2004,
Section 6 identified the following procedures for determining a collection loss:
The balance In this account represents the estimated expense to cover unexpected losses for
tenant rents. Under GAAP, LHA S;should not use the direct write-off method but shall adopt the
allowance method for uncollectIble rents, Once the allowance method is adopted, all collection
losses approved to be written (off)by the Board and according to DHCD policy shall be charged
against account 1123 (allowance for doubtful accounts - tenant rents) Additionally, any
subsequent collection of an amount that has been written-off shall be credited to account 1123.
The balance In this account Is normally the difference between the general ledger balance of
account 1123just prior to determining the annual allowance for doubiful accounts as computed
at the end of the year.
Also,DHCD's fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2006 Budget Guidelines state,in part-
LHAs must base such collection write-offs on the following atena.
(1) The LHA has adopted and is complying with an aggressive rent collection policy (Ze late
notice, dunning notice, notice to quit; opportunity for discussion where applicable, etc.);
(2) A tenant has vacated for at least one year, and the LHA Sr diligent pursult of arrearages has
been unsuccessful(documentation of collection efforts must be submitted with request to
(write-off},'
(3) A tenant dies and the account Is uncollectible from the estate. The LHA through its counsel, If
applicable, should Immedlato contact the Probate Court in its county to Me a claim against
the estate of Me d"ased tenant The staff of the Probate Court will assist In this effort
should LHA staff have questions;and
(4) Dormant(no actWty In 12 months) vacated tenant accounts receivables which exceed two
(2) years may remain on the auffionty8; books only if the LHA can show just reason for it.
7hose vacated tenant accounts receivables which are over 18 monffis old, which are not
written off, must have a written explanation in the rile of why they are remaining on the
active accounts receivable ledger.
As -a result of incorrect rent determinations and inaccurate postings to the rent rolls, the
Authority has and will continue to experience revenue losses leading to a finthcr decline in the
already low operating reserves.
Rewmmendadhn
The Authority should identify any tenant accounts receivables that are uncollectible, obtain
Board approval, and ensure that its'Fee Accountant makes the proper accounting entries as
required in DHCD's Accounting Manual.
9
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
Audi ee s Responoe
Me A uthonty has adopted and is complying with an aggressive rent collection policy(/e= late
notkes, dunning notices, noVeas to qvit-and orponttnity for&FCUSsion where appliwble). &low
is the latest Fee Accountant's Comptlabon repolt It should be duly noted that balances over 60
and vacated representy pnor A uthonty Executive Direc-tar and Board Management
705 200 667
of #of #of
in Aects. Amount Agg% Amounf Amts. otal ceia,, Total owed
1.30 days 0 0,00 0 0.00 0 0.00
31.60 days 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0,00
OVER 60 days 2 5926.00 5 11475:08 7 17401.08
VACATED 0 0.00 3, 8538.70 2 14021.45 5 22560.15
TOTAL 2 5926.00 8 2001310 2 14021.45 12 39961.23
4. OPERATING RESERVES SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW THE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED LEVEL
The Authority has experienced a steady decline in its operating reserves due to questionable
decisions made by its former Board and Executive Director. Moreover,we determined that the
Board approved numerous questionable payments (see Audit Results Nos. 6, 7, and 11) and did
not fulfill its fiduciary responsibilities to provide adequate oversight of Authority operations,
resulting in an operating reserve balance below the DHCD-recommended minimum level. As a
result,the Authority may not have the financial resources necessary to fund emergency situations
or maintain the current level of services provided.
The Authority's operating reserves have declined as follows-.
Nit Balance
October 1, 2002 $262,488
October 1,2003 211,681
October 1,2004 174,671
October 1,2005 83,716
October 1,2006 75,229
It should be noted that the October 1, 2005 and October-1, 2006 balances are below DHCD's
suggested minimum level of $121,000 by$37,284 and$45,284,respectively.
10
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS-
Prudent business practices advocate that the Authority should have sufficient reserves to pay for
any unforeseen expenses. Moreover,DHCD's Accounting Manual,Section 14 states,in part:
DHCD believes the one true indicator of the financial status of a management program is
a correctly calculated operating reserve. Operating reserve is not just the combination of
unrestricted and restricted net assets but Is calculated by adding certain GAAP`
expenditures to the total of these two balances. . . . The purpose of the operating
reserve Is threefold Flrst; the operating reserve allows LHAs to have funds necessary for
cash flows. Some months more cash is paid out than is received and it is therefore
necessary to have additional cash to meet these needs ,Second, LHAs must have reserve `
funds to meet emergency situations such as major boiler or roof repairs that have not
been anticipated in the budget. Third, the operating reserve is used to fund non-routr"ne
expenditures such as the replacement of refrigerators and ranges: DHCD has established
full and minimum balances for operating reserves that act as benchmarks for LHAs to
assess the relative value of their operating reserve balances The problem in evaluating
the operating reserve has always been the question of what is the true balance. The
operating reserve actual balance is always some balance either positive or negative, but
the uue operating reserve balance requires an analysis of the balance sheet and an
understanding of how balance sheet items affect operating reserve.
Further,DHCD's fiscal year TY) 2005 and FY 2006 Budget Guidelines state,in part:
Level funding, combined with certain cosh beyond the control of the authotities, have
had a dramatic Impact upon LHA operating reserve balances. Recognizing this,DHCD will
approve in certain cases operating budgets that have fallen below the recommended'
40461 of full operating reserves. It is DHCDs anticipation that as the economy improves,
LHAs will then be able`to replenish their operating reserves to a satisfactory level. (Please
note that the term maximum reserve has been replaced by the term full reserve.)
A letter dated August 18 2005 from DHCD to the Authority's Chairperson states,in part:
The[Authontysj operating reserves have declined in recent years and the Department
must determine that reserve;funds are being expended appropriato
DHCD's October 28,2005 Special Scope Review states,in part:
Because the [Aub7o,7W does not have comprehensive maintenance plans„ operating
reserves have not been expended in the most effective manner.
The Authority's operating reserves have dwindled because the Board has not fulfilled its>
fiduciary responsibility for the overall proper administration of the Authority by establishing
general policies and guidelines,approving contractual agreements, monitoring performance,and
planning for future activities,
1"1
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
Recoinmendation
The Authority should adhere to DHCD's policies and guidelines to ensure that it has adequate
reserve funds available for any unforeseen occurrences. The Board should take a more active
role in providing oversight for Authority operations.
Audi's Response
As noted in your audit report the prior Board old not fulfill it;fidudary responsibility for
the overall proper adm inistra Non of the Authority by establishing policies and guidelines.
The current Board Is well aware of Its fiduciary responsibility and in fact empects to end
this fiscal year with a reserve balance of$121,000 which Is the suggested m1mmal level
requiredbyDHCD in the future ffils board MY take an active role in providing ovemight
for the Auffiarity. This includes deve(oping a comprehensAe maintenance plan to ensure
the AuffioW has sufficient reserves as mandated by DHCV to, meet emergency
situations.
S. INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER PAYROLL
Our review disclosed that the Authority was operating without an official written approved
personnel policy and that neither the Executive Director nor the administrative staff prepared
weekly timesheets. In addition, the system used to track employee leave balances did not meet
DHCD standards. The Authority used post-it notes to record hours worked for each employee
rather than a formal attendance report We also noted that the Authority paid two
administrative staff employees for compensatory time, even though administrative staff is
prohibited from accruing compensatory time without approval from D14CD. Two members of
the Authority's administrative staff received compensatory time payments of $5,424 in February
of 2006 and$2,118 in October 2006,as follows:
EM21ovee f g ftuwa octgo
A $3,260 $ 975
B 2.164
Total S5.424
The Authority is required by the terms of DHCD's Contract for Financial Assistance to have an
approved Management Plan that includes personnel regulations. DHCD's public housing
notice—2002-05 Executive Director's Salary and Qualifications Scheduleeffective July 1,2002
states,in part
Daily Nmesheety and attendance records for execublve directors must be maintalned at
ffie 1HA office for review by ffie Swrd, DHCO and the Office Of the SZ9 Aadihx
12
2007-0595-3A AU®JT RESULTS
Also,DHCD's Accounting Manual,Section 15(l) states,in part:
Fbtmal attendance reporty will be necessary to proviaLe infonnabion for the pre;wradon of
payroll and to maintain adequate control of annual leave, sick leave, rev ;arm, hollbay
work, and Paid leave with respect to each employee.
DHCD's October 28,2005 Special Scope Review states,in part
Missing;fundamental policies Indude bylaws, managemen4 personnel and procurement
policies The lack of such policles means that the [AuffionW Is not aperaftng in
compliance with laws or Departnent regulations.
Infon-nal Admlnls&atyve practices such as personnel records management have
negaz*ely impacted the [AUffi017tYV finances Reviewets found that the [Auffimty]
cannot accurately account for vacation and pesonat leave a or suffbenO trac*
over me cosls use of inadequate personnet records.
Additionally,a letter dated October 1, 2006 from 1 14CD to the Authority's Chairperson states,
in part;
We must emphasize agaln, a d1realve that has been' conveyed both through
cvm spondence and by phone to all[A uthonW admialstrative staff and to you, and that
Is, that fffie Authority's] administrative staff are prohibited from performing overtime
work Inasmuch, no compensatlon, either monetary or compensalmy time in lieu of
wages may be provided to the employees by the[AuffiodW. If there is a specilk need
for an [..]administrative staff member to peffolm overtime work In otd& to address
day-to-clay operation of time Authority please contact your management spedallst, to
discuss the issue prior to any such "rk being performed
We were unable to verify payroll costs because there is no supporting documentation such as
timesheets (as no earlier) and formal attendance calendars. Similarly, compensatory time
balances could not be verified because of the inadequate system used to track employee time and
attendance.
Personnel policies are necessary to instruct and give guidance for accurate maintenance of
employee time and attendance, as well as compensatory time. Without personnel policies, there
is potential risk of an unfunded liability that could adversely affect its operating reserves, which
currently are below the required minimum balance of $121,000 (See Audit Result No. 4),
Without sufficient attendance records, there is inadequate documentation to support sick and
vacation tune earned and taken by its employees. Also, should an employ= leave the
Authority's employment, there would be no record of accrued time that may be due the
employee.
13
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
Recommendation
The Authority needs to strengthen the controls over its payroll system by developing and
implementing personnel policies that require employees to certify the accuracy of their
timesheets and instruct 'management to review and approve employee timesheets in a timely
manner. In addition, the Authority should improve oversight controls over its payroll records
by: (1) requiring that employee attendance records be prepared, reviewed, and approved in a
timely manner; (2) adopting procedures to ensure that all employee time records and accrued.
benefit records are adequately documented to substantiate employees' work hours and leave
time for each pay period; and (3) reviewing and updating the Authority's payroll policies to
include a policy that requires supervisory approval of all employee time records and accrued
benefit records in a timely manner. Moreover,the Authority's Board of Directors should closely
monitor the payroll process and authorize any changes or additions made to the Authority's
personnel'policies.
Auditee's Response
On June 12, 2007 the Aulhonty received approval from DHC®to implement the following
Policies which were submitted and approved by the Board of Commissioners on February
20, 10117.E
• By Laws
• Personnel Policy
• AI&madve Action
• Admissions and Continued Occupancy
• Procurement Policy
The approval of these policies allows the Authority oversight°control over its payroll
records including(1)requiring Mat employee attendance records be prepared, reviewed
and approved in a timely manner, this includes the Execudve Director, (2)procedures in
place to ensure all employee time records and acaved benefit records are adequately
documented to substantiate employee work hours and leave 17mes for ead�pay period.
The Board of Commissioners will clos*monitor payroll policies and authorize changes
or additions to the Authority into personnel policies as needed.
6. QUESTIONABLE PAYMENTS TOTALING IN EXCESS OF$8,000
Our review of Authority records revealed over $8,000 in questionable payments associated with
a former administrative employee. These payments included $2,900 for outside attorney
services, $3,375 for a psychological evaluation of the former employee,and$1,727 for wages and
accrued sick leave. These payments were not approved by DHCD, and the $1,727 in wages was
14
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
in excess of what the former employee wasr entitled to based on available documentation, and
these unallowable expenditures adversely affected the Authority's already low operating reserve.
The Authority was involved in a prolonged personnel dispute that resulted in an administrative
employee's resignation. Because of the employee's employment history and civil service status,
the Authority used the services of an outside counsel rather than utilizing the resources available
through DHCD's risk management program to reach a settlement with the employee. Our
review of payroll time and attendance records revealed that the Authority paid 20% ($381) of the
employee's undocumented accumulated sick leave estimated balance on the April 6, 2005
settlement date. 'The accumulated sick leave paid to the employee was made even though she
was not entitled to the payment; employees are only paid 201/16 of their sick leave balance when
they retire. The Authority also continued to pay an extra three weeks salary ($1,346) through
April 30, 2005 because it failed to take the, employee off the payroll on the April 6, 2005
settlement date. Furthermore, we could not verify the accuracy of the sick leave accrued and
payment made because there were no formal attendance records for the employee. (See Audit
Result No. 5.)
Housing authorities are expected to contact DHCD's risk management program to assess
potential litigation and provide assistance and resources as necessary in order to protect both the
Authority's and the Commonwealth's interests.
'Me current Executive Director indicated he would go to the Board and D14CD for guidance
should this situation arise in the future.
RewmmendabFbn
The Authority should seek repayment for the unauthorized expenditure of state funds in the
execution of the employee's settlement agreement. Any funds recovered should be reinstated to
the Authority's operating reserve account.
.Audi 'a Response
It shw1d be dulY no that neiffier ffie cuffent Executive Dlr&-Wr nor board of -
Commkvskn&s ware involved in ,his prolonged paswnel dispute that resulted in a17
adwtnJs&abvoe emplqyees resignab•on and ffiesubsequentpayments Made Thecurrent
Executive Direr and Board of Commissioners undelstand ffiat any sudr exposure for
the Authority needs to be astsigned to DHCM;risk manat7anent progratn,so as to assess
Potential litigation and pro de assistance and resources in order to protect bum ffie
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
AuffiontyS; and the Commonwealffi`s interest- While the 8dard respe� dw
rewmmendabm of your audit to seek repayment for Me unauthonzed exper&ire ,lt
does not feel that sud effor& would result in Me recoupment of any revenue and is not
in tie best interest of the Auffionty at this time
7. QUESTIONABLE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT CONTRACT
The Authority entered into a management consultant contract, dated December 1, 2000, with
the former Springfield Housing Authority's Director of Leased Housing for professional
services tendered in the performance of rent re-evaluations of the Authority's 242 residents for
fiscal year 2001.The initial $15,000 contract was approved by DHCD with an expiration date of
May 1, 2001. After the contract expired, the Authority continued to pay for these consultant
services, at the rate of $50 per hour, without undertaking -another procurement process or
seeking alternate bids. ne Authority did not seek or receive DHCD's approval to continue to
pay the former contractor after the contract expired; therefore, the contract was invalid. During
the period April 1, 2004 to May 30, 2005, the Authority paid this consultant approximately
$18,100 (we were not able to determine the exact amount because of missing invoices). The
Authority ceased payments to this consultant after DHCD's May 2005 on-site review found
them to be questionable.
Following DHCD's on-site review, the former Executive Director sent a letter to DHCD, dated
June 8, 2005, stating that after the initial contract expired the Authority executed "'agreements
for services" and the consultant qualified as a"sole source provider"and was thus exempt from
the procurement process outlined in Chapter 30B of the Massachusetts General Laws. DHCD
responded that the services provided do not qualify as sole-source pro=ement and, without
documentation of the procurement process, it was unable to determine that the extension
agreements would qualify for the sole source exemption.
DHCD's Accounting Manual,Bidding Summary, Section 16-17, states,in part:
Contracts in excess of$10,000 are subjLoct to DHCD approval
Additionally,we noted that the Authority does not have a DHCD-approved procurement policy
to ensure that the Authority follows applicable procurement laws when contracting for services
or purchasing materials.
16
2007-0595-3A AUD1T RESULTS
Recommendadon
The Authority should procure services according to Chapter 30B of the General Laws and
DHCD policies by submitting contracts, supporting documentation, and by obtaining a certified
Board vote for approval.
A udif ee'F Response
It should be duly noted that the current Executive Director and Board of Commissioners
were not Involved In the decisions to enter Into the Management Consultant Contract
referenced In this audit As previously stated Me Board has adopted and DHCD has
approved a procurement policy for the Authonty. This policy ensures that all procurement
services are performed according to M.G.L. Chapter 30B and DHCD regulations.
8. NONCOMPLIANCE WITH TENANT SELECTION PROCEDURES
Our audit revealed that the Authority's tenant selection procedures were not in compliance with
DHCD policies and regulations. More specifically, tenant -applications, leases, and waiting lists
were neither properly processed nor maintained. Consequently, eligible applicants may have
been denied or delayed housing assistance.
Tenant Applications and Leases Not Processed or Maintained Properly
Our review of 19 applicants housed during the -audit period October 1, 2004 to December
31, 2006 found several shortcomings regarding the application and tenant selection
processes as hallows:.
• Applications were not stamped with the date and time.
• Applications did not contain reviewer signatures.
• Incomplete applications were given control numbers.
• Ineligible applicants were placed on waiting fists.
• Leases and lease addendums were missing in files.
760 CMR 5.05 states,in part:
0 Each application form received by the LHA shall be date and time stamped, and the
applicant promptly pro v1ded with a:receipt including the Control number. After a completed
aPPI'Cation form Is received, the LHA shall make a preliminary determination of eligibility
based on information In Me form and shall also determine whether an applicant appears to
be entitled to any preference or pnonty status The LHA May at th/5 lime, in Its dlsaeton,
17
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
vedfy some or all infofmabon provided 7he applicant shall be notified of the LHA;;
preliminary detelmination and may request a pdivate conferwoe if found inellgible or not to
be entitled to a pnority or preference category requested
(3) When an applicant approaches the top of the waiting la, the LHA shall make a final
deten,nination of the applican& e1Vb1111y and qualification. 7he applicant shall update the
application and provide any additional information or verification reasonably required by the
LHA.
Contrary to DHCD regulations, applicants were allowed to request specific developments
(locations). When a unit became available, an applicant requesting that specific development,
regardless of their control number,was offered the unit and given five days to accept. Also, new
references and Criminal Offender Records Information (CO" were not obtained prior to
housing applicants;rather,original references and CORI from the date of application were used.
760 CMR 5.10 further states,in part:
(1c)...when a unit or rental assistance voudier becomes available, it shall be offered to the
applicant for the applicable program with an approphate household size who has the lowest
control number in the highest pre&ymce category wIffiln the highest priority category
760 CMR 5.12 states,in part-
(1) At the time of determining final ellgibility and qualftation, the LHA shall require an
applicant to provide the LHA acress to reliable and reasonably obtainable d=mentatwn
v&Tying the accuracy of information appeanng on Me apollcatidn form or offiermse
necessary for the LHAs aWafminabon income of applicants it be venfied by the
procedure :ged for rent determination If the LHA has verift"ed any Inhirmation when
makng a prdimtnaf y determination of eligibility far the appltcan4 the LHA shall re-m7fy such
infotmadon on Its Mal cietelmination of eligibility and qualirkabon Dori-recept of requested
documentaton, wrthout good cause established by the appltcan4 shall be cause for
deten,771hing Me applicant unqualified.
(3) In determining qualftaton the LHA shall chec* 07minal Offender ReconY
Infonradon.,
Inaccurate Waiting lists Maintained
Our review of the tenant selection process revealed that the Authority did not maintain the
Master and Waiting List Ledgers properly as required by 760 Code of Massachusetts Rcgulations
5.00. Our comparison of the Master Ledger to the Waiting List Ledgers for the period October
1,2004 to December 31,2006 revealed 76 inconsistencies:
35 (465/6) — Applicants deemed eligible on the Master Ledger were not included on the
appropriate Waiting list Ledgers
18
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
0 27 (36%)—Incorrect priority recorded on Waiting List 1,edger
# 3 (4%)—Applicants on the Waiting List adger but not on the Master List
0 3 (4%)—Applications deemed incomplete or not eligible on Waiting List Ledgers
0 1 (10/6)—Incorrect application date on Waiting List Ledger
0 7 (99/6)—Other errors,including applicants placed on wrong Waiting List Ledger
The Master and the Waiting List Ledgers, which determine the proper ordered placement of
housing applicants in state-aided housing units, fist all applicants and include a control number,
the applicants name, the date of application, and a matrix detennining the applicants priority
and preferences for each applicant The control number, along with the priority and preference
status,is then recorded in the Waiting List Ledger,which should be current and from which the
selection of the next eligible applicant is made for the vacant state-aided housing unit. Since the
Master Ledger and the Waiting List Ledgers do not agree,it could not be determined whether
eligible applicants were selected for housing in the proper sequence.
The Authority last updated its Waiting List Ledger in January 2004; however, the update did not
include all applicants on the Waiting List bccausc the Authority selected certain priorities and
preference categories (local resident) among family and elderly/handicapped applicants. The
Authority should have done a complete update for all applicants within a particular housing
program.
760 CMR 5.14 states,in part
:he 1HA shall update and recYassify all applications on file at least once In every three
years in the following manner:
(1) The LHA shall contact each apollcant,
(a) to oeta mine wheffier or not.
1. applicant Is still interesWin, obtaining housing through the LHA;
2 1he applicant isst111pn-J1m1naf*ell ible;
3 the applIcants prefefence and pnofity status remaln ffie same,
and
19
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
(b) to advise the applicant that a failure to respond will result In removal of the
applIcation from the waiting fist. Any applicant, whose application is so
removed from the walling fist shall be given notice of the removal and ffie
rght to request a private conference,
(2) Zhe LHA shall review all updated information and may change Its detemunaton of
preliminary eligibility and pnonty and/or preference status The LHA shall notify
each applicant of Its determination and the nght to request a pavate conference
These noncompliance issues as well as how to properly post the Master Ledger and Waiting List
were reviewed with the current Executive Director, who stated that the Authority is in the
process of working with DHCD to improve its record keeping in these areas. He also indicated
that the Authority purchased a new web-based software program that maintains the Waiting
Lists and tenant information.
Recommendation
We commend the current Executive Director for taking steps to comply with the regulations.
He should continue working with DHCD to ensure compliance with DHCD tenant selection
regulations and that the Master and Waiting list Ledgers are maintained in accordance with
DHCD requirements.
Auditee';Response
The &a1d commends the partnership established between DHCD and 777e Authofitys
staff that had resulted In a heroic effort that has brought all tenant selection procedures
Into complIance with DHCD regulations In addlbon the,Authority has purchased software
. . . . which allows total control that-will ensure the proper order o(placement of housing
applicants In addition to pf vvtdlng a check and balance system The Authority's Master
and Waiting List Ledgers are now up to date and In accordance witch DHCD requirementy.
9. RENT DETERMINATION DEFICIENCIES
Our review of 25 tenant files noted that 15 tenants were charged incorrect rents based on
insufficient documentation of income and deductions claimed by tenants. In addition, the
Authority did not have a copy of DHCD's Heat Allowance Schedule to substantiate the related
deductions given to tenants.
760 CMR 6.04 (c),Response by the Tenant, states:
WIffiln thirty (30) days following the date of the notice of redetermination, the 187ant
shall pro wde, under pains and penalties of perjury, sufficient, complete and accurate
infonvalzon for the LHA to make a reliable determination of the householdS; Income,
exclusions from Income, and applicable deductions.
20
2007-0595-3A AUXT RESULTS
Recommendadon
The current Executive Director should continue his efforts to comply with DHCD's rent
determination regulations.
Audi spouse
As stated above the purchase of. software has allowed the Authority to gain control
over all aspects of tenant selections, as well as rent determ1nat7on. Pnor to Mis software
it was necessary to maintain various sour`documents in dtflerent locations (7his
software] allows for all tenant infonnation, including Worksheat Rent Calculations to be
stored wiffim the System under each tenant""ale*.� Tenantpaper"Viles"have been re-
organized so that all files are consistent as to at and where documentation is to be
found We have recently finished the recerhficabon process and all calculations were In
compliance w6di DHG0 r55gt/456017S.
10. IMPROPER STORAGE OF CRIMINAL OFFENDER RECORD INFORMATION(CORI)
Our review noted that the Authority had haphazardly stored CORI information in the basement
of the Agawam Senior Center, thereby violating the sanctity of information received. We also
noted that the Authority is not in compliance with its own CORI Policy, which was adopted by
the Board on January 19, 1993,which states,in part:
CORI shall be kept in a separate, Axked flle cabinet when not being used, CORI shall
be destroyed when the applicant to whom it pertains has been housed If an apollcant
has been oetwmined inellgible for howng, the applicant-s CORI shall be oesftyed three
(3)years from the date of the applIcant's re)ectlon, or after allaammistiaNe andjudbal
proceedings concerning the reJectipan are exhaustW whidOieever is later.
The language in the Authority's policy is exactly as stated in 803 CMR 5.00, Regulations
Governing Request for and Use of CORI by Local Housing Authorities.
760 CMR 6.06, Provisions as to Certain Obligations of the LHA, states that the lease shall
specify the following obligations of the LHA:
(4)(k) To preserve the confidentiality of records In accordance with and to the extent
provided by 760 C74R 8.00 and other applicable laws.
Moreover,760 CMR 8.04,Access to Personal Data,states,in part:
(2) Q ination of E=2UgI l as A Hok&shall not allow any individual, agency or
entity not enplayed by the Holder or under contract or agreement wily the Holder. .
under 760 t NR 8 04(l)to have access to personal data . . .
21
" 2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is very protective of the privacy and confidentiality of the
information gathered on individuals for the files of entities termed "holders," such as the
Authority. The Fair Information Practices Law (Chapter 66A, Section;2, of the General Laws)
provides that every agency'that holds personal data shall "identify one person who shall be
immediately responsible for personal data and who shall ensure that the requirements of
[Chapter 66A) for preventing access to; or dissemination of data are followed." The
responsibilities are extensive, and violation of this law is punishable by the sanctions of Chapter
214 Section 3B,of the General Laws.
Also,the Fair Information Practices Act Statement of Rights signed by applicants states,in part
The Authority collects Information about applicants and tenants for its housing,programs
as required by in order to determine eligibility, amount of rent and tore apartment
size. When permitted by law, it may be released to government agencies, other housing
authortr'es, and to civil Or criminal investigators or prosecutor: Omerwise, the
information will be kept confidential and used only by housing authority staff in the
course'of their duties
Furthermore, CORI guidelines state that access to CORI by unauthorized individuals is
prohibited.-
Reciommendatian
The current Executive :Director should continue his efforts to comply with DHCD's CORI
regulations,as well as the Authority's own policies regarding CORI storage and access.
Auditee's Response
The Authonly has adopted the fallowing- All CORI request and receipt are now web
based The CORI file is deleted when the applicant to whom it pertains has been`
housed. When an applicant is determined to be ineligible for Housing the applicant's
CORI is printed out and stored in a locked file cabinet for three years from the close of
the applicants rejectlon or alter all administrative and judicial`proceedings conceming
the rejection are exhausted.
il. QU ST O EJQ QQFaAUTHORITiYfASSETS AND FUNDS f
A
Our audit revealed that the Authority experienced a;steady and significant decline in its financial
position as a result of poor administrative decisions made by its Board of Directors,which has
not fulfilled its fiduciary responsibilities of adequately monitoring and reviewing' Authority'
operations. Specifically, we noted: a) high personal usage of Authority cell phones; b)
22
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
questionable gasoline -card purchases; and c) inappropriate, unallowable, or inadequately
supported expenditures of Authority funds.
a. ;Personal Use of Authority Cell Phones
Our review of cell phone bills during the period October 1, 2004 to December 31, 2006 found
high personal usage with little or no monitoring. For example, a maintenance employee called a
family tenant 64 times in one month. This socialization between an Authority employee and a
tenant is strictly prohibited based on a March 26,2004 memo to the maintenance staff from the
Board of Commissioners that was signed by all maintenance employees.
'Me rmemo`states,in part:
Personal relationships and socialization between tenants, vendors, and employees are;
strictly prohibited during working hours and overtime. Personal relationships ,and
socialization between tenants, vendors, and employees after business hours is singly
discouraged.,
Also,DHCD 2005 and 2006 Budget Guidelines state:
Cell Phones• The use of cellular phones has increaser/greatly at LHAs over the past few'
years This has happened with few, if any, 'ground rules"concerning their use. A few
basic rules will now need to be applied to the use of such phones
I. Employee access will need to be approved by the board
ii. Use should be work related only..In instances where there are charges
due to personal calls reimbursement must be made by the user to the
authority.
ii. An itemized bill will need to be received and signed by the employee
using the cell phone.
iv. There should be a statement attached to the bill, where the employee
signs and attests to the fact that no personal phone charges have been
made byhimJher on the phone, and that all personal charges have been
reimbursed to the authority.
b. Questionable Gasoline Purchases
Our review of gasoline card purchases found that the Authority spent in excess of$14,000`for
6,480 gallons of gasoline. Based on the number of gallons of gasoline purchased, we estimated
that the Authority's maintenance truck:should have traveled over 100,000 miles, when it actually'
only traveled 46,215 miles. We also noted that a,maintenance employee purchased over 800`
gallons of gasoline at a cost in excess of 11,784 with his assigned gas card,while according to the
23
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
payroll records/time sheets he was reported as sick,on vacation,or not on call. Many purchases
were made it locations far from Agawam,including Orange and Gardner. On April 11,2005 the
maintenance employee requested that $40 be withheld frorn his pay for using the Authority
gasoline card for his personal use.
We also noted that maintenance employees had been allowed to take the Authority's truck home
when they were on call (commencing prior to our audit period) until the practice was stopped by
a Board vote on October 18, 2004. One maintenance employee traveled 102 miles roundtrip
from Agawam to his home in Orange (no record of number of trips) in die Authority truck.
Conwary to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations, the Authority did not report the value of
the vehicles personal use as a taxable fringe benefit on the Forms W-2 issued to the maintenance
staff
IRS Regulation 713, Fringe Benefits,which discusses the tax effect of personal use of company
automobiles, states,in part:
The benefits may be included as Income to the extent the employee uses them for
personalptilpose.
c. Inappropriate, Unallowable, or Inadequately Supported Expenditures of Authority
Funds
We also noted numerous questionable expenditures that were either inappropriate, unallowable,
or lacked supporting documentation.
Specifically,we noted the following questionable expenditures-
• The former Executive Director was reimbursed $453 for his personal cell phone bins
without proof that the charges were directly related to state-aided housing units.
• During the period September 2005 to March 2006, the Authority paid $70 in mental health
co-payments for the former Executive Director.
• The former Executive Director was reimbursed approximately $200 that was charged to his
personal credit card for staff luncheons.
• On February 9, 2005 the former Executive Director held-a retirement party for a Board
member. On the same day, the former Director requested reimbursement from the
Authority for$230 for the cost of the food -and-a gratuity. The Authority paid this amount
on February 23,2005 from the travel account.
24
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
-'eIn D_ecemt�er 2005, the former Executive Director instructed office staff to order two air
�; blowers_for approximately'$360. 'When the blowers were delivered, the former"Executive
Director instructed--the-ma ntenar ce'staff to put them in his personal vehicle so he could
haftk them home where they were to be used. On June 29, 2006, the Board sent the former
Director a letter-asking that the blowers be returned.,On=July 13, 2006 the Authority's
attorney sent a letter to the former Director's attorney,sta r
As we discussed previously, the Agawam Housing Authority is in receipt of
information rregarding two blowers which (..J purchased with Authority funds and
then had members of the maintenance staff place them in his car,'If the Housing
Authority-does not receive these blowers at the Housing Authority by 4,00 p.m. on
Friday,`Ju/y`14,'2006, an'application for a Criminal Complaintwll be filed against �+
for larceny.
Neither the Authority's nor the Board's attorneys followed through with filing an application-
for larceny and the matter was dropped by the Board.
• The Authority paid for two telephone lines that did not belong to them. One line was a
switched toil free number in Canada that the Authority has been paying for since December
1, 2001. The other line belongs to,a private citizen but the Authority has been paying for it
since July 23,:2003. When brought to the attention of the Authority's Office Manager,she
contacted die Telephone Company and both lines were disconnected.Also, the Authority is
actively seeking a refund for these charges.
• Two Board members traveling to a National Association of Housing and Redevelopment;
Officials (NAHRO) conference received reimbursement for tolls, contrary to DHCD FY
2005 Budget Guidelines. In addition, one Board member received reimbursement for
gratuities and one Beard member received reimbursement for supper in excess of DHCD's
allowable amount,
DHCD's FY 2005 Budget Guidelines state,in kart:
Phvate auto mileage incurred in Me course of authority business, is reimbursable at
the rate of twenty-eight cents($0.28)per mile. Such rate is generally inclusive of
tolls and parking fees. ...... Reimbursement for tolls and parking is allowed if the
traveler takes these actual costs in lieu of any mileage reimbursement
In addition,DHCD's FY 2005 and 2006 Budget Guidelines state,in part:
Reimbursement for meals rs allowed if the following amena are met.
Supper., Travel must end at 7:00 p.m. or later-$12.00 maximum allowable.
In summary, the following items are not allowable as reimbursement from state
funds;
-payment for meals to excess of allowable amounts'
25
t
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
• Office and maintenance staff requested and were paid travel expenses on days off and
weekends.
• The Authority paid $50 for-a maintenance employee's personal parking ticket. This employee
parked in a tow-away zone while in a meeting with the Authority's attorney. The Authority
also incurred;late charges due to the fact that the ticket was received on,July 28, 2004 and
was not paid until October 18,2004.
Collectively, the issues noted above contributed to the steady and significant decline in the
Authority's financial position. The Authority's Board has not fulfilled its fiduciary responsibility
for the overall proper administration of the Authority by establishing general policies and
guidelines,;monitoring performance,and planning for future activities.
Recommendation
The Authority should adhere to DHCD ;policies as well as amend its own policies and
procedures relative to reviewing expenses for allowability and accuracy before payment. DHCD
and its legal counsel should review the propriety of these questionable expenditures, and
reimbursement should be sought for any payments DHCD deems to be improper. Also, in light
of the questionable disbursements and other matters discussed in this report,DHCD may again
need to take a more active role in monitoring the Authority's activities. Furthermore, the
Authority needs to ensure that it adheres to IRS regulations by including personal use of
Authority vehicles on the employees'W-2 forms'.
Auditee`s Response
As previously stated the present Board not only understands its fiduciary responsibility
far the overall proper administration of this Authority. The Board also realizes the
importance of policies and guidelines to prevent such activities from happening ever
again. The present Executive Director has worked closely with DHW to develop not only
policies but L7'e&s and Balance systems to ensure drat any improper activities will be
addressed immediately. 'The Board will fake an active role in monitoring lire performance
of these pollcies and guidelines.
12. INADEQUATE INVENTORY CONTROLS
We found; a lack of internal controls and accountability over the Authority's furniture,
equipment, tools,and supplies,and further noted that the Authority does not have any inventory
policies in place. Our tests of the Authority's inventory list noted that the locations of assets
were not reflected on the list, three of nine items did not have property identification tags, one
item could not be located,and a;tractor valued at$5,734 had been sold according to an Authority
26
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
maintenance staff person even though it still appeared on the listing. We also noted that the
Authority does not conduct an annual physical inventory, and has not made any adjustments to
its inventory fisting since October 2004.
DHCD's accounting manual for state-aided housing programs, Section 15, requires authorities
to account for all inventory additions or deletions as well as update the physical listing on an
annual basis. DHCD requires that a formal system for the inventory of furniture and equipment
be established by all LHAs. Additionally, Section 15,page 9, states:
The inventarypmcedures are as follows. 1) Establish Fumtture and Equ#nent Record
Cards or use an autoaiaW system; 2) rag all equipment with an inventory tag with an
assigned asset number, .3) rake an in ventmy once a year
Section 15,page 10,states:
Prooeduras for Tagging and Local Furniture and Equipment 1) A to shall be afflixed
securely on an easily acressIble surface of each item of recorded non-expendable
equipment Each tag will display the housing authontyls name as well as a numerical 4gurg,-
2) 7he issuance of the tags will be controlled by the Accounting Department and must be
reserved for each &M at ffie Me Of ordering equipment Awedures for Inventory of
Funikure and Equipment.- 1) A physical inventory of all Furniture and Non-ex;oendable
Equipment must be taken and an inventory list maintained each year, 2)A�psical Inventoly
results must be conipat ed to equipment record and any differences and discrnwncies will
be reviewed by the/HA for possible adjustments.
The deficiencies were due to the Authority's lack of policies and procedures regarding inventory
and management's disregard for the importance of a well-maintained inventory system.
Accordingly, there is a lack of internal controls and accountability over finmiture, equipment,
tools,and supplies. *Merefore, the Authority is unable to demonstrate or determine what-assets
it has, the location of these assets, or to what extent items may have been lost, stolen, removed
from the Authority's property, or discarded due to their condition. Since the Authority's
inventory was not up to date, the accuracy of the $63,440 value reflected on its general ledger
and financial statements cannot be determined.
RecommendaMon
The Authority should:
a. Establish tten inventory policies.
b. Conduct a complete physical count of its property and assets and record location,
condition,and value,and apply an asset number to items missing tags.
27
2007-0595-3A AUDIT RESULTS
s
C. Review all purchases trade during the last 27 months to determine what it has in its
possession, determine what it should actually possess, and ascertain what is missing
or unaccounted for.
d., Maintain a perpetual inventory record for all assets in order to ensure that controls
are in place to safeguard and properly account for those assets.
Auditee's Response
With the closing of the current fiscal year the Authority will conduct a complete physical
count of its propedy and assets, noting location, condition and value. ;Any missing asset'
tags will,be applied. This count will be compared to the book value and adjustedd in
addition we will review prior.records to by and determine what items are missing or
unaccounted for. Eadt fiscal year this physical inventory will betaken to compare to the
GIL Balance.
13. PET SECURITY DEPOSITS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH DHCD REGULATIONS
Our review of the Authority's;pet policy indicated that the policy has not been approved by
DHCD and is not in compliance with DHCD regulations. The;Authority does not provide any
information regarding the activity or the interest earned by the pet security deposit account to
tenants and in addition, the Authority is not doing anything with the interest;earned from this
account. The Authority's policy states:;
pet deposits will be rearmed to tenants when(the Authority)receives proof they no longer
have the pet or when they move out, minus a mandatory de-fleeing charge'
However„DHCD' stated in its Special Scope Review that the Authority cannot charge tenants a
mandatory de-fleeing charge if pest control services;are not required when the pet is no Ionger in
the residence.
Our review of the bank statements, bankbook, and trial balance listing of tenant deposits
indicated that the Authority is not reconciling the balances. The balances as of September 30,
2006 were as follows: bank passbook $4,375, bank statement $4,218, and trial balance $3,558.
Due to the poor condition of the Authority's records, we could not accurately determine which
balance is correct
760 CMR 6.07 states:
Each housing autftonly shall have a pet,policy for its elderly/handicapped housing. The
policy should be consistent`with and reflect the requirements in napter 151 of the Acts of
1989, DHCD regulations and the pet guidelines
28
2007-0595-3A AUDrr RESULTS
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter186,Section 15B,states:
Security deposits must be maintained in a separate bank account and that must provide
tenants with the name and location of the bank in which the security deposit has been
deposited as well as the amount and account number of the deposit account.
At the informal exit conference, the Executive Director stated that he felt it was part of the Fee
Accountant's responsibilities to reconcile the pet account and;that he has instructed the Fee
Accountant to do so. New policies are in place and the interest earned on the account will be
donated to MSPCA.
Reavmmendadon
The;Authority should review their pet policy, revise as necessary, and obtain DHCD approval.
All pet owners should be brought up to date on their deposits. We commend the Authority for
its efforts to revise the policy and donate the interest earned on the account to the MSPCA, and
further recommend that the Authority continue to donate the interest or give the interest back
to tenants. The Authority should also reconcile the balance in the bank account to the
bankbook and general ledger.
Auditee's ltespoime
The Board has adopted and DHCD has approved a pet policy for all elderly/handicapped
Housing. The policy is consistent with and reflects all requirements of aapter 151 and
the Acts of 1989. In-addition interest has been calculated and retumed to the tenants as
hest as could bye determined. Bank Balances have been reconciled to the GIL and will be
part of each monMly close
29
2007-0595-3A APPENDIX I
APPENDIX
STATE SANITARY CODE NONCOMPLIANCE NOTED
QevellgRMen
Location Noncompliance Regulation
5D Brady Village Kitchen—Baseboard Heat 105 CMR 410.351
Covers Missing
Bedroom—Wall Crumbling Due to 105 CMR 410.500
Water Leak
113 Brady Village Living Room—Cracked Electric 105 CMR 410-351
Switchplate Cover
Kitchen— Broken Window 105 CMR 410.501
Kitchen -Trash 105 CMR 410.602
2D Brady Village Living Room —Missing Smoke 105 CMR 410.482;
Detector MGL C-148 S.26B
Basement—Heating Pipe 105 CMR 410.353
Insulation Failing Apart
8A Brady Village Entire Unit—Missing Baseboards 105 CMR 410.505
Living Room— Missing Smoke 105 CMR 410.482;
Detectors MGL C148 S26B
Bedroom —Water Stains on Walls 105 CMR 410.500
and Ceiling
Bedroom—Window Condensation 105 CMR 410.501
1 IC Brady Village lage Entire Unit—Trash and Furniture 105 CMR 410.602
left Behind
Basement Stairs—No Handrail 105 CMR 410.503
30
APPENDIXII
PHOTOGRAPHS CONDITIONS FOU
Unit IS BrokenWindow
Unit Switch Plate Missing
y
,.. ,,
,.
Unit . s Heat Cover Missing
r
y �1
n
32
Unit 5D Wall Crur bti
�4 4f
Unit 8A Smoke Detect
ttfa�f
i
�i tl
r ro
�s
r
33
Unit 8A Watef Stains on Wall and Ceiling
S t
� � 4
Y{t
4 a Y
S\tZ ��4,t4t?
t
Unit SA Window ndenwitw
34
s
��vvvtz v S r r 4� rw v`
eft 1 '°fit ash Left in Basement
y
i
r` Records
.....�..
3
............... ...................................... —-----------— —----------------
2007-0595-3A AP"PENDEX 11
Authority Records in Water
Haphazard Storage of Authority Records
...............
36