Audit of the Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission
January 6, 2023 · Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission · Read the full official report on mass.gov ↗
Published January 6, 2023 Audit covers July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2021 Under Suzanne M. Bump · 2011–2023
source
“MRC made payments totaling $497,493 to a vendor that was debarred and therefore not eligible to receive these payments.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
This is a state performance audit of the Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission, covering July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021.
“This report details the audit objectives, scope, methodology, findings, and recommendations for the audit period, July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021.”
Written agreements help make sure people in training get the services, pay terms, and protections required by state rules.
“If MRC does not ensure that all individuals receiving MRC’s OJT services have the required formal written employment agreements, it will not be able to ensure that the individuals’ employers meet all of the OJT requirements established by state regulations.”
For residents with disabilities, this matters because MRC’s job-training services are meant to help people get long-term employment.
“MRC provides on-the-job training services to secure long-term employment for individuals with disabilities.”
The auditor found MRC passed two checks and failed two: it did not keep all required training agreements and did not prevent payments to a barred vendor.
“Below is a list of our audit objectives, indicating each question we intended our audit to answer; the conclusion we reached regarding each objective; and, if applicable, where each objective is discussed in the audit findings.”
The auditor recommended that MRC add monitoring controls for both training agreements and vendor debarment checks.
“MRC should establish monitoring controls to ensure that MRC staff members check the debarment status of contractors before awarding or renewing contracts.”
The financial risk is real: the audit says MRC paid $497,493 to a vendor that should not have been eligible, which could create service-quality and repayment problems.
“Contracting with a vendor that has been debarred could result in MRC receiving substandard goods or services and may also result in MRC having to reimburse the federal government for any federal funds it used to pay debarred vendors.”
“Debarred” means a vendor or contractor has been barred from getting public contracts, often because of serious problems such as fraud or unsafe conditions.
“Vendors or contractors may be debarred or suspended—by the federal government or the state—from being awarded public contracts for several reasons.”
1 figure(s) pending source verification - not shown
What the Auditor checked
- Did not comply Did MRC maintain written agreements for on-the-job training (OJT) in accordance with Section 6.07(12) of Title 107 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR)?
- Did not comply Did MRC check the debarred vendor lists before awarding or renewing a contract to ensure that it does not award a contract to a debarred vendor, as required by the “State Finance Law and General Contract Requirements” policy, which was jointly issued by the Office of the Comptroller of the Commonwealth (CTR) and the state Operational Services Division?
- Complied Did MRC employees managing COVID-19 funds complete required cybersecurity awareness training in accordance with Sections 6.2.3 and 6.2.4 of the Executive Office of Technology Services and Security’s (EOTSS’s) Information Security Risk Management Standard IS.010?
What the Auditor found
Why it matters: MRC could not ensure that employers met all on-the-job training requirements established by state regulations.
Standard: Section 6.07(12) of Title 107 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations ( Section 6.07(12) of Title 107 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations )
1 recommendation
- MRC should establish monitoring controls to ensure that it executes formal written employment agreements between MRC, employers, and the participating individuals and maintains these agreements in the individuals’ consumer records.agency: already implemented
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "MRC recognizes that general case management internal controls were insufficient to guarantee each On-Job-Training (OJT) participant had completed a separately maintained, formal written employment agreement in accordance with required procedures."
Auditor: "Based on its response, MRC is taking measures to address our concerns on this matter."
Why it matters: Contracting with a debarred vendor could result in substandard goods or services and possible reimbursement of federal funds used for those payments.
Standard: State Finance Law and General Contract Requirements policy
1 recommendation
- MRC should establish monitoring controls to ensure that MRC staff members check the debarment status of contractors before awarding or renewing contracts. These controls should include a requirement to document the monitoring.agency: disagreed
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "MRC respectfully objects to the findings of the Office of the State Auditor as described in Finding #2."
Auditor: "As signatory parties, both MRC and DCAMM are required to check the debarred vendor lists, and both failed to comply with the above-referenced policy and regulatory requirements to check the debarred vendor lists."
More audits of this entity
Other Office of the State Auditor reports on Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission .
- Single Audit of the Commonwealth - Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission (MRC)Authority / Commission · May 17, 2012
- Massachusetts Rehabilitation CommissionAuthority / Commission · May 12, 2011
- Audit of the Massachusetts Rehabilitation CommissionAuthority / Commission · July 3, 2018