Audit of the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
April 9, 2018 · University of Massachusetts - Dartmouth · Read the full official report on mass.gov ↗
Published April 9, 2018 Audit covers July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2016; property and equipment extended through December 28, 2016 Under Suzanne M. Bump · 2011–2023
source
“Below is a summary of our findings and recommendations, with links to each page listed.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
This is a state performance audit of selected UMass Dartmouth activities for July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2016, with property and equipment review extended to December 28, 2016.
“This report details the audit objectives, scope, methodology, findings, and recommendations for the audit period, July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2016.”
The State Auditor reviewed whether the university followed its own rules for asset tracking, procurement-card spending, and services for students with disabilities.
“In this performance audit, we examined certain UMass Dartmouth activities related to the inventory of fixed assets, certain expenditures made using the university’s procurement cards (Procards), and the administration of certain services for students who are covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.”
For taxpayers, this audit is about whether a public university is protecting equipment and spending money according to rules.
“UMass Dartmouth allowed prohibited purchases on the university’s procurement cards (Procards), resulting in a higher-than-acceptable risk of misuse of university funds.”
The university needed better controls: auditors found missing or unlisted assets and prohibited purchases made with university cards.
“UMass Dartmouth did not properly administer its inventory of fixed assets.”
Auditors recommended stronger monitoring, investigation of missing assets, cleaner inventory records, and better training and oversight for procurement-card use.
“UMass Dartmouth should enhance its training and monitoring controls to ensure that established policies and procedures are consistently followed.”
The report says UMass Dartmouth had already begun or planned changes that should improve oversight of assets and purchasing cards.
“We believe UMass Dartmouth’s proposed changes to its internal practices will strengthen its oversight and monitoring of the Procard process.”
A Procard is a university purchasing card used by approved staff for small-dollar supplies and preapproved travel costs.
“According to the university’s Procard User Guide, Procards are issued to faculty and staff members “to purchase and pay for consumable commodities of a low dollar value, as well as travel expenses, when pre-approved.””
8 figure(s) pending source verification - not shown
What the Auditor checked
- Did not comply Is UMass Dartmouth properly administering its inventory of fixed assets in accordance with its policies and procedures?
- Did not comply Are procurement-card (Procard) expenses appropriate according to UMass Dartmouth’s policies and procedures?
- Complied Has UMass Dartmouth taken effective measures to ensure that the needs of students with disabilities are incorporated into emergency plans and that these students have access to supplemental learning aids and services?
What the Auditor found
Why it matters: There was a higher-than-acceptable risk of undetected theft or misuse of fixed assets.
Standard: UMass Dartmouth’s Moveable Equipment Inventory User Manual requires accurate asset records and processing of fixed assets into the asset management module. ( UMass Dartmouth’s Moveable Equipment Inventory User Manual )
2 recommendations
- Management should enhance its monitoring controls to ensure compliance with inventory policies and procedures.agency: already implemented
- Management should investigate why assets in the inventory list could not be located and take necessary action, including updating the inventory list.agency: agreed
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "The 330 items on the Staging Table have been reconciled with all assets being tagged that required tagging."
Auditor: "The actions taken by UMass Dartmouth to address its inventory practices, as described above, were responsive to our concerns and will allow it to account for its assets more effectively."
Why it matters: There was a higher-than-acceptable risk of misuse of university funds.
Standard: UMass Dartmouth’s Procard User Guide and Business Expense Policy and Procedure restrict Procard purchases and require documentation, approvals, and receipt logs. ( UMass Dartmouth’s Procard User Guide; UMass Dartmouth Business Expense Policy and Procedure )
1 recommendation
- UMass Dartmouth should enhance its training and monitoring controls to ensure that established policies and procedures are consistently followed.agency: agreed
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "The [Procard] purchases referred to as prohibited were appropriate business purchases; however, we understand that according to policy they should have been purchased by other means, e.g., via a purchase order."
Auditor: "We believe UMass Dartmouth’s proposed changes to its internal practices will strengthen its oversight and monitoring of the Procard process."
More audits of this entity
Other Office of the State Auditor reports on University of Massachusetts - Dartmouth .
- Audit of the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth (May 2, 2024)College / University · May 2, 2024
- University of Massachusetts - DartmouthCollege / University · February 22, 2012