Franklin Housing Authority

This is a performance audit of the Franklin Housing Authority covering April 1, 2010 through June 30, 2012.

“I am pleased to provide this performance audit of the Franklin Housing Authority.”

Auditors wanted to check whether the authority had proper controls over buying goods and services and whether it followed procurement rules.

“The objectives of our audit were to review and analyze the Authority’s internal controls over its procurement of goods and services and to determine whether its procurement activities were efficient and in compliance with the Department of Housing and Community Development’s (DHCD’s) procurement guidelines and laws, rules, and regulations applicable to state-aided housing programs.”

The authority manages public housing, including units for elderly residents, veterans and their families, residents with special needs, and families.

“The Authority oversees 165 units of state housing for the elderly, 28 units for veterans and their families, 8 units for residents with special needs, and 5 family scattered sites.”

For ordinary residents, the audit says the authority’s tested purchasing practices were properly controlled and followed required rules during the audit period.

“Based on our audit, we have concluded that, for the period April 1, 2010 through June 30, 2012, the Authority maintained adequate internal controls in the areas tested and was conducting its procurements in an efficient manner in compliance with DHCD guidelines and laws, rules, and regulations applicable to state-aided housing programs.”

The audit did not report findings requiring correction; it concluded the tested procurement controls and practices were adequate and compliant.

“Based on our audit, we have concluded that, for the period April 1, 2010 through June 30, 2012, the Authority maintained adequate internal controls in the areas tested and conducted its procurements in an efficient manner in compliance with DHCD guidelines and applicable laws, rules, and regulations.”

The report does not list corrective actions or recommendations; it says audit staff discussed the report with authority management.

“My audit staff discussed the contents of this report with management of the Authority.”

This was a limited-scope audit, so its positive conclusion applies to the tested areas, not every possible control at the authority.

“Our evaluation of internal controls was not designed to provide assurance regarding the effectiveness of the internal control structure as a whole.”

“Procurement” means how the authority buys goods and services; the auditors checked policies, samples of purchases, bidding-law compliance, contract requirements, and possible joint purchasing for savings.

“We selected non-statistical samples of purchases of equipment and other commodities made during the audit period to evaluate the Authority’s efforts to obtain the best value; to verify compliance with the purchasing requirements of Chapter 30B and with DHCD contract requirements; and to determine whether the Authority is coordinating with other local entities, such as municipalities, school departments, or regional planning organizations, to purchase goods and services collectively in order to take advantage of potential cost savings through bulk purchasing.”