We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
The Habitat Group Logo
  • NY Apartment Law
    • New York Apartment Law Insider
    • New York Landlord V. Tenant
    • Co-Op & Condo Case Law Digest
    • New York Rent Regulation Checklist, Fourth Edition
    • 2025 New York City Apartment Management Checklist
  • Fair & Affordable Housing
    • Fair Housing Coach
    • Assisted Housing Management Insider
    • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    • Fair Housing Boot Camp. Basic Training For New Hires
  • Commercial Lease Law
    • Commercial Lease Law Insider
    • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
      • Best Commercial Lease Clauses, 17/e
    • Best Commercial Lease Clauses: Tenant's Edition
  • Guidebooks
  • December 06, 2025
  • Log In
  • Log Out
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • December 06, 2025
AHMI Logo.webp
  • Archives
  • Main Articles
    • Features
    • Certification
    • Compliance
    • Crime & Security
    • Dealing with Households
    • Income Calculations
    • Maintenance
    • Screening Applicants
  • Departments
    • Dos and Don'ts
    • Q and A
    • Recent Court Rulings
    • HUD Audits
    • In the News
    • Ask the Insider
      • Send Us A Question
  • eAlerts
  • Blogs
Free Issue
The Habitat Group Logo
December 06, 2025
  • Log In
  • Log Out
  • My Account
Home » Housing Authority of the County of Lackawanna Must Improve Internal Controls

Housing Authority of the County of Lackawanna Must Improve Internal Controls

Mar 28, 2014

HUD received an anonymous complaint alleging incompetent leadership, nepotism, misuse of funds, and poor quality of life at the Housing Authority of the County of Lackawanna, Pa. In response, HUD audited the authority to determine whether the allegations in the complaint had merit and whether the authority had effective internal controls.

HUD auditors found that the allegations in the complaint had merit. The authority allowed a conflict-of-interest situation to exist, didn’t settle an interfund account balance totaling $370,234 in a timely manner, didn’t check to identify parties excluded from doing business with HUD, and assumed an undue risk by not controlling its employees’ use of authority-owned vehicles. Auditors discussed these deficiencies with authority officials during the audit, and they took some immediate corrective action and informed auditors that they planned to take additional corrective action.

The auditors recommended that HUD require the authority to develop and implement: (1) policies and procedures to detect, prevent, and resolve conflict-of-interest situations; and (2) controls to ensure that interfund accounts are settled in a timely manner, thereby putting $370,234 to better use over a one-year period.

  • HUD Audit Report No. 2014-PH-1003, Feb. 28, 2014
HUD Audits
    • Related Articles

      OIG: HUD Should Improve Oversight of Sites with Low Inspection Scores

      HUD Must Ensure Households Have Sufficient Supply of Safe Drinking Water

      Orange County, Calif., PHA Didn’t Always Ensure That Housing Units Met HQS

    • Publications
      • Assisted Housing Management Insider
      • Commercial Lease Law Insider
      • Co-op & Condo Case Law Tracker Digest
      • Fair Housing Coach
      • New York Apartment Law Insider
      • New York Landlord v. Tenant
      • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    • Additional Links
      • Contact Us
      • Advertise
      • Group Subscriptions
      • Privacy Policy
      • Terms of Use
    • Boards of Advisors
      • Assisted Housing Management Insider
      • Commercial Lease Law Insider
      • Fair Housing Coach
      • New York Apartment Law Insider
      • Tax Credit Housing Management Insider
    ©2025. All Rights Reserved. Content: The Habitat Group. CMS, Hosting & Web Development: ePublishing