SEATTLE—May 29, 2003—The Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development today issued an audit report concerning the Seattle Housing Authority's administration of the Welfare-to-Work Section 8 Tenant-based Assistance Program from 1999 to early 2001.

The audit, which criticizes several aspects of the agency's administration of the program, contends that SHA "did not provide adequate management oversight over program administration."

Responding to the audit report, Executive Director Harry Thomas emphasized the housing authority's commitment to the Welfare-to-Work program. "This program has made it possible for us to put badly-needed housing vouchers into the hands of over 700 deserving and extremely-low-income families," he said. "It is a great program, and although we firmly believe that we have administered the program properly, we welcome the suggestions of the Inspector General's office because they will help us to do an even better job."

Under the "Welfare-to-Work" voucher program, SHA received 700 new Section 8 vouchers in late 1999. The special program was designed to help families become more self-sufficient and move from welfare to work. SHA collaborated with the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services to identify applicants on its waiting list who were also enrolled in the State's "Work First" program under "Temporary Aid to Needy Families" (TANF).

The audit report suggests that SHA should have taken further steps with each household to determine whether or not receiving a housing voucher was critical to the family's ability to successfully obtain or retain employment.

In fact, the agency has been working steadily over the last two years to improve administration of the Housing Choice Voucher program, including the Welfare-to-Work program. Efforts to date include:

• Establishing a comprehensive technical training program for all Section 8 staff, including supervisors and line staff.
   
• Adding 8 new line staff positions to the Section 8 program.
   
• Instituting a peer audit system to ensure accuracy of family data entered into SHA's waiting list database.
   
• Completing a major revision of written policies and procedures, including SHA's Section 8 administrative plan.
   
• Reorganizing the Section 8 division to increase management accountability for the family selection process.
   
• Closing the Section 8 waiting list to reduce the risk of errors in managing and maintaining an excessively long list.
   

In addition to these changes, SHA is also in the process of updating its compliance procedures, with the help of an outside legal firm. According to General Counsel James Fearn, "We want to make sure that we have all the checks and balances in place to assure compliance with the terms of every program we administer."

One of the audit's findings criticized the agency's spending of just over $130,000 to secure housing counseling services by various non-profit organizations. While the audit reported that the services themselves were properly procured, it found that the funds came from the wrong account. SHA already has complied with the auditor's suggestion by transferring the expense to a different account.

"This was a very thorough audit by the Office of the Inspector General," said Thomas. "We appreciate the auditors' careful review and will use the findings to improve our procedures to the greatest extent possible. At the same time, it is important to note that we have several legitimate disagreements with the audit staff on the administration of this program. We believe we accurately interpreted the program regulations and look forward to using it to continue serving needy low-income residents who are seeking housing assistance in order to move from welfare to work."