Action Inc.
July 8, 2014 · Read the full official report (PDF) ↗
source
“For reviewed areas related to our audit objectives, we did not identify any significant deficiencies warranting attention by those responsible for governance.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
This is a Massachusetts State Auditor performance audit of Action Inc., a nonprofit human-service agency in Gloucester, covering October 1, 2011 through September 30, 2013.
“I am pleased to provide this performance audit of Action Inc.”
The audit checked whether Action had proper controls over spending, contracts, program monitoring, related-party transactions, and board oversight.
“Our audit objectives were to examine Action’s internal controls, reporting, and compliance measures to ensure that (1) administrative and program expenses, including management fees, were reasonable and related to program services; (2) contract management controls and procedures functioned as designed; (3) its monitoring of programs and subcontractors was effective; (4) related-party transactions were properly documented; and (5) board governance was effective.”
Action handles public and private funding for services such as housing, energy help, job training, education, and home care, so the public has an interest in whether that money is managed properly.
“During our audit period, Action operated a variety of programs offering services related to housing and homelessness, energy, income maintenance, education and training, and home care.”
If you live in the area or rely on services like fuel assistance, housing help, or job training, the audit suggests the agency had reasonable controls over the areas reviewed.
“Action has established internal control policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that organizational objectives and compliance obligations are met and that associated risks such as those for fraud, waste, and abuse are minimized.”
The Auditor found no significant noncompliance or control problems that needed to be reported for the audit objectives.
“We assessed the operating effectiveness of relevant controls and did not identify significant control deficiencies or other deficiencies pertaining to our audit objectives that warranted attention by those responsible for governance.”
The report does not call for corrective action; Action reviewed a draft and did not submit a written response.
“At the conclusion of our audit work, we provided a draft copy of this audit report to Action management, who chose not to provide any written response to the report.”
This is a clean audit result for the areas reviewed: the Auditor found Action’s controls reasonable and did not flag major issues for its board.
“Action has established internal control policies and procedures that provide reasonable assurance that organizational objectives and compliance obligations are met and that associated risks such as those for fraud, waste, and abuse are minimized.”
A Community Action Agency is a local nonprofit created to help low-income people in its community.
“Community Action Agencies are local nonprofit organizations established under the 1964 Economic Opportunity Act to provide assistance to low-income people in their communities.”
What the Auditor checked
- Complied Did Action Inc. have adequate internal controls, reporting, and compliance measures to ensure that administrative and program expenses were reasonable and related to program services; contract management controls and procedures functioned as designed; monitoring of programs and subcontractors was effective; related-party transactions were properly documented; and board governance was effective?