Audit of the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources
August 22, 2018 · Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources · Read the full official report on mass.gov ↗
Published August 22, 2018 Audit covers July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2017 Under Suzanne M. Bump · 2011–2023
source
“MDAR is not effectively monitoring the use of APR Program farmland.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
This is a state performance audit of the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources, focused on how it ran the Agricultural Preservation Restriction Program from July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2017.
“In this performance audit, we examined MDAR’s activities related to its administration of the Agricultural Preservation Restriction (APR) Program.”
The auditor wanted to know whether MDAR was running the farmland preservation program according to laws, rules, best practices, and its own procedures.
“Does MDAR administer the Agricultural Preservation Restriction (APR) Program in accordance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and best practices in addition to its own internal policies and procedures?”
If MDAR does not check on protected farmland, land that was paid for with public money to stay agricultural could be misused or damaged without the state noticing.
“Without routinely monitoring these farmland parcels, MDAR cannot ensure that APR Program farmland is properly used for agricultural purposes, and the agency forgoes opportunities to meet with participating farmers to share information.”
For residents, this matters because taxpayer money is used to preserve farmland, and the public has an interest in making sure that land stays available for farming and food production.
“The main goal of this program is to protect the long-term sustainability of the nation’s food supply by preventing farmland from being used for non-agricultural purposes.”
The auditor concluded that MDAR’s APR Program had real weaknesses: it did not monitor many farms well, did not educate farmers enough, and used a sale process that lacked transparency.
“Certain aspects of MDAR’s administration of the APR Program could be improved.”
The auditor recommended that MDAR monitor APR parcels every year, improve farmer training and guidance, make sale rules clearer, and consider appeal and withdrawal options for farmland sales.
“MDAR should develop policies and procedures that require the annual monitoring of APR Program parcels.”
The program is large and long-running: Massachusetts has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to preserve tens of thousands of acres, so weak oversight affects a major public investment.
“Since the APR Program’s inception, the Commonwealth has spent approximately $353 million to purchase 73,000 acres of farmland.”
What the Auditor checked
- Did not comply Does MDAR administer the Agricultural Preservation Restriction (APR) Program in accordance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and best practices in addition to its own internal policies and procedures?
What the Auditor found
Why it matters: Without routine monitoring, MDAR cannot ensure APR Program farmland is used for agricultural purposes and may miss abuses such as illegal dumping, vandalism, or damage that makes land unsuitable for agricultural use.
Standard: Section F of the APR/ALE Program agreement requires MDAR to annually monitor premises for compliance with the NRCS conservation plan and the restriction; MDAR's standard APR Program contract authorizes entry with prior notice to determine compliance. ( Section F of the APR/ALE Program agreement )
1 recommendation
- MDAR should develop policies and procedures that require the annual monitoring of APR Program parcels.
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "Nevertheless, MDAR acknowledges that adequate monitoring is a key component of ensuring the continued agricultural viability of APR land and preventing abandonment or other issues that could lead to enforcement actions."
Why it matters: Farmers may not fully understand APR Program requirements and processes, which can lead to lower-than-expected revenue, financial stress, or unintentional violations of program requirements.
Standard: USDA education and assistance resources and Land for Good's farmer education model are cited as best practices; MDAR operates under APR Program regulations in 330 CMR Section 22. ( Section 22 of Title 330 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations )
2 recommendations
- MDAR should seek the funding and other resources necessary to establish a formal training component that covers all aspects of the APR Program for both potential and current APR Program farmland owners.agency: agreed
- MDAR should review, and update as necessary, all APR Program information and documents to ensure that they are current and understandable and detail all aspects of the program, including different scenarios that could occur in the sale of property.agency: agreed
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "MDAR agrees that effective education and outreach are crucial components of the APR program, and is committed to continuing a strong partnership with Massachusetts farmers to maintain the viability of agricultural land."
Auditor: "We concur with MDAR’s stated commitment to improve farmer education, which will help strengthen MDAR’s and farmers’ understanding of the goals of the APR Program."
Why it matters: The sale process can hinder APR Program farmland owners' ability to derive maximum benefit from sales and can limit otherwise qualified buyers.
Standard: Chapter 184, Section 31 of the Massachusetts General Laws gives MDAR broad authority; 801 CMR 21.06(4) is cited as a procurement transparency standard requiring reasons for rejected bidders and an opportunity for debriefing. ( Section 31 of Chapter 184 of the Massachusetts General Laws; 801 CMR 21.06(4) )
3 recommendations
- MDAR should amend its guidelines to include when and under what conditions it will exercise its option to use the OPAV provision and also to allow losing bidders to obtain information about why their bids were not accepted.agency: partially agreed
- ALPC should consider taking the measures necessary to allow APR Program farmland owners to appeal sales of their property that have been denied by MDAR.
- MDAR should take whatever measures it deems appropriate to address the issue of allowing a farmer to withdraw from the sale of APR Program farmland parcels if MDAR assigns the option to purchase to someone other than their preferred purchasers.
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "While we disagree with certain statements and findings in the draft audit report, we agree with the overall sentiment that MDAR should work to promote greater transparency in its decision-making in these areas."
Auditor: "Based on its response, MDAR is taking measures to address our concerns about the APR Program."
More audits of this entity
Other Office of the State Auditor reports on Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources .
- Audit of the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources (June 12, 2024)State Agency / Office · June 12, 2024