Stoughton Housing Authority
September 17, 2013 · Read the full official report (PDF) ↗
source
“Based on our audit, we have concluded that, for the period July 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.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
This is a performance audit of the Stoughton Housing Authority by the Massachusetts Office of the State Auditor.
“I am pleased to provide you with this performance audit of the Stoughton Housing Authority.”
Auditors wanted to see whether the housing 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 and rental vouchers, so its purchasing practices affect how public housing resources are handled.
“The Authority oversees 182 units of state housing for the elderly, 26 units for veterans and their families, 8 units for residents with special needs, 7 family scattered sites, and 11 project-based family housing units.”
For an ordinary Stoughton resident, the key point is that auditors found the housing authority was following the tested purchasing rules during the audit period.
“Based on our audit, we have concluded that, for the period July 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 against the authority; it concluded the tested procurement controls and practices were adequate and compliant.
“Based on our audit, we have concluded that, for the period July 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; it says the auditor discussed the report with housing authority management.
“We discussed the contents of this report with management of the Authority.”
This is a clean audit result for the areas tested, but it was limited to certain activities and controls, not every part of 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, including whether it follows public bidding and contract rules.
“To accomplish our audit objectives, we reviewed the Authority’s procurement policies and procedures to verify that they include criteria for compliance with the state’s public bidding law (Chapter 30B of the General Laws) and DHCD guidelines.”
What the Auditor checked
- Complied Did the Authority maintain internal controls over procurement of goods and services and conduct procurement activities efficiently and in compliance with DHCD guidelines and applicable laws, rules, and regulations?