Seal of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Massachusetts Audit Explorer - what the State Auditor found

← all audits

Department of Environmental Protection

September 5, 2013 · Read the full official report (PDF) ↗

Published September 5, 2013 Audit covers July 1, 2010 – September 30, 2011 Under Suzanne M. Bump · 2011–2023

In plain English
The audit found that DEP did not have strong enough controls over state-issued cell phones and smartphones, including who got them, how plans were chosen, and whether use was monitored for cost and abuse.
source
“Our audit disclosed that DEP had not established adequate controls over communication devices provided to its employees.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
What is this?

This is a Massachusetts State Auditor performance audit of the Department of Environmental Protection covering July 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011.

“In accordance with Chapter 11, Section 12, of the General Laws, the Office of the State Auditor has conducted a performance audit of DEP for the period July 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011.”
Why was it audited?

Auditors wanted to see whether DEP was managing state cars and communication devices in a cost-effective way and watching for possible misuse.

“The objective of our audit was to review the internal controls DEP had established over its employees’ use of its automobiles and communication devices such as cell phones and smartphones to determine whether DEP’s policies and procedures in these areas were cost-effective and employee use was adequately monitored to prevent abuse.”
Why it matters

Public money was paying for these devices, so DEP needed to make sure it was choosing plans carefully and using state resources wisely.

“OSC’s Internal Control Guide indicates that effectiveness and efficiency are the most common fundamental management responsibilities and that “because resources are always scarce, management is responsible for making the best use of the resources that are available.””
What's in it for me?

For taxpayers, the issue is whether DEP was paying more than necessary for phones and data plans, including devices that were barely used or not used at all.

“During this period, one employee did not use a DEP-provided smartphone that cost the department $52 for the month.”
The bottom line

The auditor found four main problems: no formal written rules, no documented needs assessment before choosing plans, weak monitoring of use and cost, and no clear criteria for assigning devices.

“We determined that during our audit period, DEP did not:”
What happens next

The auditor recommended written policies, regular reviews of phone use and plans, clearer approval rules, and checking whether provider reports could help lower costs.

“To achieve the most cost-effective use of its communication devices, DEP should take the following measures:”
Why it's significant

The report matters because DEP had 168 state-owned communication devices costing $155,168 over 15 months, and weak controls meant the agency could not prove every device and plan was necessary or cost-effective.

“For the 15-month period ended September 30, 2011, DEP administered 168 communication devices (61 cell phones and 107 smartphones) at a total cost of $155,168.”
Jargon, unpacked

“Internal controls” means the rules and procedures an agency uses to make sure work is done properly, risks are reduced, and spending can be checked.

“Controls are most frequently comprised of policies and procedures.”

3 figure(s) pending source verification - not shown

What the Auditor found

DEP did not have adequate internal controls over employee communication devices.
internal controlsprocurement/contractsrecordkeeping/documentationvendor oversight

Why it matters: DEP could not ensure that devices were assigned only for legitimate business needs, service plans were cost-effective, costs and use were monitored, or employees understood their responsibilities.

Standard: Office of the State Comptroller’s Internal Control Guide and prudent business practices for written policies, monitoring, and cost-effective resource use. ( Chapter 11, Section 12, of the Massachusetts General Laws; Office of the State Comptroller’s Internal Control Guide )

4 recommendations
  • Establish formal written policies and procedures over employee use of assigned communication devices, including appropriate use, monitoring, personal use, reimbursement, eligibility, periodic reevaluation, and employee acknowledgement forms.agency: partially agreed
  • Assess communication needs and usage to determine whether carrier plans match employee voice and data needs, monitor monthly statements at least quarterly, identify inappropriate use and underused devices, and adjust or deactivate plans as appropriate.agency: partially agreed
  • Establish a formal review and approval process documenting criteria for device assignments, employee responsibilities requiring a device, why other communication methods are not cost-effective, and potential savings.agency: partially agreed
  • Determine whether optimization reports are available from communication providers for use as a management tool to reduce costs.
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "The Department concurs that there was no formal written policy; however an established internal procedure existed."

More audits of this entity

Other Office of the State Auditor reports on Department of Environmental Protection .

See this entity's page with all 3 audits →