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

← all audits

George H. and Irene L. Walker Home for Children

October 8, 2015 · Read the full official report (PDF) ↗

Published October 8, 2015 Audit covers July 1, 2012 – June 30, 2014 Under Suzanne M. Bump · 2011–2023

In plain English
The state auditor reviewed Walker Home for Children and did not find major problems that needed to be reported.
source
“Our audit revealed no significant instances of noncompliance required to be reported under generally accepted government auditing standards.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
What is this?

This is a Massachusetts State Auditor performance audit of Walker Home for Children, a Needham nonprofit serving children and families through special education and behavioral health services.

“The George H. and Irene L. Walker Home for Children (Walker) is a not-for-profit special-education and behavioral-health organization offering educational and clinical services for children and their families.”
Why was it audited?

The auditor checked whether Walker followed applicable rules and contract requirements for state-funded work during July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2014.

“We reviewed Walker’s activities to determine its compliance with applicable laws, regulations, policies, and procedures, as well as the terms and conditions of its state contracts, in the areas reviewed.”
Why it matters

Walker received public money, including from state agencies, so the audit looked at whether that money and related operations were handled properly.

“During our audit period, Walker received state funding primarily from contracts with the Department of Mental Health and the Department of Children and Families.”
What's in it for me?

For an ordinary citizen, the key takeaway is that the auditor found the reviewed state contracts, payments, expenses, governance, and surplus revenue were handled properly.

“Below is a list of our audit objectives, indicating each question we intended our audit to answer and the conclusion we reached regarding each objective.”
The bottom line

The audit’s answers were all yes: the areas reviewed complied with the rules and contract terms the auditor tested.

“Did payments for contracted services comply with the regulations promulgated by the state’s Operational Services Division (OSD) and with state contract terms?”
What happens next

The report does not list corrective actions or recommendations, because it did not report significant noncompliance.

“This report details the audit objectives, scope, and methodology for the audit period, July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2014.”
Why it's significant

This matters because Walker was a sizable service provider, with more than $20 million in total revenue in each audited fiscal year, and the auditor found no significant reportable compliance problems.

“Walker’s revenue from all sources for fiscal years 2013 and 2014 was as follows:”
Jargon, unpacked

A performance audit is a review that checks whether an organization followed rules, contracts, and procedures in specific areas, using evidence and audit standards.

“We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.”

What the Auditor checked