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

← all audits

Suffolk Superior Criminal Court

April 14, 2011 · Read the full official report (PDF) ↗

Published April 14, 2011 Audit covers July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2010 Under Suzanne M. Bump · 2011–2023

In plain English
The auditor found no major problems with how the Suffolk Superior Court Clerk’s Office for Criminal Business handled cash, revenue, and bail funds during the audit period.
source
“Our tests in the above-mentioned areas disclosed no material weaknesses.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
What is this?

This is a Massachusetts State Auditor performance audit of certain activities at the Suffolk Superior Court Clerk’s Office for Criminal Business.

“We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.”
Why was it audited?

The audit checked whether the clerk’s office had adequate controls for handling cash, revenues, and bail money, and whether it followed applicable rules and procedures.

“The objectives of our audit were to assess the adequacy of the Clerk’s Office’s internal controls over cash management, revenues, and bail funds, and to determine the extent of controls for measuring, reporting, and monitoring effectiveness and efficiency regarding compliance with applicable state laws, rules, and regulations; other state guidelines; and Administrative Office of the Trial Court and Superior Court Department policies and procedures.”
Why it matters

Court offices handle public money and bail funds, so strong controls help protect funds and show whether the office is following the rules.

“Based on our review, we determined that, during the 24-month period ended June 30, 2010, the Clerk’s Office for Criminal Business within Suffolk Superior Court maintained adequate management controls and complied with applicable laws, rules, and regulations regarding cash management, revenue collection and processing activities, and bail fund management.”
What's in it for me?

For an ordinary citizen, the key takeaway is that this audit did not find major weaknesses in the office’s handling of money and bail funds during the period reviewed.

“Our tests in the above-mentioned areas disclosed no material weaknesses.”
The bottom line

The auditor concluded that the office had adequate controls and complied with relevant laws and procedures for the areas reviewed.

“Based on our review, we determined that, during the 24-month period ended June 30, 2010, the Clerk’s Office for Criminal Business within Suffolk Superior Court maintained adequate management controls and complied with applicable laws, rules, and regulations regarding cash management, revenue collection and processing activities, and bail fund management.”
What happens next

The report does not describe any required fixes or follow-up actions, because the audit found no material weaknesses in the tested areas.

“Our tests in the above-mentioned areas disclosed no material weaknesses.”
Why it's significant

This is a clean audit result for the specific money-handling areas reviewed over the 24-month audit period.

“Based on our review, we determined that, during the 24-month period ended June 30, 2010, the Clerk’s Office for Criminal Business within Suffolk Superior Court maintained adequate management controls and complied with applicable laws, rules, and regulations regarding cash management, revenue collection and processing activities, and bail fund management.”
Jargon, unpacked

“Internal controls” means the office’s checks and procedures for managing money, collecting revenue, processing payments, and handling bail funds properly.

“Evaluated internal controls over cash management and revenue collection and processing activities.”

What the Auditor checked