Audit Report on the Emergency Repair Program of the Department of Housing Preservation and Development

AUDIT REPORT IN BRIEF

This audit assessed the administration of the Emergency Repair Program (ERP) by the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD). ERP is responsible for correcting confirmed emergency conditions in privately-owned and City-owned buildings. The HPD Central Complaint Bureau (now part of the City’s 311 System) receives complaints about emergency conditions from tenants and informs the building owner of the allegation. If the condition continues to exist, verified by an HPD inspection, a "notice of violation" is issued to the owner, who is given 24 to 72 hours—depending upon the existing condition—to make the repairs. If the repair is not made, ERP either hires a contractor, using an "Open Market Order," or assigns its own employees, using its "Handyman Work Orders." In either case, once the repair is made, HPD notifies the Department of Finance (Finance) of the cost of the repair. Finance is responsible for billing the owner for the cost of repairs. If the owner fails to pay the bill within 60 days, a lien is placed on the property.

ERP generally followed HPD’s Emergency Repair Program OMO Processing Flow procedures when paying vendors for services performed and for documenting that the conditions noted in the complaints were corrected. Also, ERP generally followed its established procedures for documenting that the conditions were corrected when agency employees made the needed repairs. Moreover, HPD transferred the relevant information to Finance so that the landlords could be billed for the costs incurred by ERP in correcting the emergency conditions. However, the audit disclosed the following minor exceptions.

• Nine voucher packages—five of 456 Handyman Work Order packages and four of 470 Open Market Order packages—were missing from HPD’s files.
• Fourteen Open Market Orders lacked authorization signatures or documents.
• One Open Market Order voucher package lacked a preparer’s signature, and a second lacked the pre-audit certification signature.
• Twelve Open Market Order voucher packages did not contain the Affidavit of Work, which would indicate that a vendor completed the repair work according to the terms of the Open Market Order.

We recommend that HPD ensure that:

• All voucher packages are accounted for by establishing a checklist to record and track voucher packages; and
• Each voucher package contains all required documents and authorizations.