| Organization: | Office of the State Auditor |
|---|---|
| Date published: | September 21, 2026 |
Executive Summary
In accordance with Section 12 of Chapter 11 of the Massachusetts General Laws, the Office of the State Auditor has conducted a performance audit of certain activities of the Department of Unemployment Assistance (DUA) during the period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024. When analyzing DUA’s call log data, we revised the audit period to August 26, 2024 through August 26, 2025 because, according to conversations with DUA officials, DUA only retains call log data for the latest 13-month period, and this revised timeframe allowed us to review call log data that DUA had in its possession.
The purpose of our audit was to determine the following:
- To what extent did DUA establish formal metrics for timely responses to claimant inquiries and requests made via telephone calls?
- Did DUA process initial unemployment insurance (UI) claims in a timely manner by issuing each claimant’s first benefit payment in accordance with the federal Employment and Training Administration’s (ETA’s) “UI PERFORMS Core Measures”?
- Did DUA ensure that its vendor, Fast Enterprises LLC, resolved system issues that were reported during the implementation of the Employment Modernization and Transformation (EMT) project before the EMT system’s full implementation for claimant use, in accordance with the “EMT Production Support Procedures”?
- To what extent did DUA provide a minimum level of in-person assistance for individuals applying for unemployment compensation at its regional offices in accordance with the language of Section 62A(a) of Chapter 151A of the General Laws that was in effect during the audit period?
Below is a summary of our findings, the effects of those findings, and our recommendations, with hyperlinks to each page listed.
| Finding 1 | DUA mismanaged the oversight of its call center’s performance by not establishing performance standards or monitoring procedures to ensure timely responses to claimant telephone inquiries, leading to significant call wait times. |
| Effect | If DUA does not establish formal performance standards or metrics and does not monitor call log data, then it cannot ensure that it handles claimant inquiries in a timely and consistent manner. Significant wait times for callers may result in delayed access to UI benefits, decreased trust in DUA, and reduced overall efficiency of call center operations. Without monitoring and performance standards, DUA lacks the ability to identify operational bottlenecks, allocate resources effectively, or implement improvements to enhance service delivery. |
| Recommendations |
|
| Finding 2 | DUA failed to meet the ETA’s timeliness standards for claimant first benefit payments. |
| Effect | Delays in first benefit payments can cause undue financial stress to claimants who rely on their benefit payments to pay everyday expenses. In addition, by not meeting ETA’s first benefit payment promptness standards, DUA risks losing federal funding for noncompliance, which would further affect its ability to effectively administer UI benefits. |
| Recommendations |
|
| Finding 3 | DUA violated Section 62A(a) of Chapter 151A of the General Laws by failing to provide in-person assistance at three of its regional offices. |
| Effect | Because in-person assistance was only available at the Boston Re-Employment Center, claimants in other regional locations were required to travel to Boston. This limited access to face-to-face support, particularly for individuals who lacked the time, resources, or reliable transportation to Boston, or internet access to file a claim online. Some claimants may have had to rely solely on telephone calls or DUA’s online portal, with the significant delays and other issues cited in Finding 1. This may have reduced accessibility, further increased wait times, and created barriers for certain populations in the Commonwealth and interstate claimants, potentially delaying access to essential unemployment assistance. |
| Recommendations |
|
| Finding 4 | DUA violated Section 8 of Chapter 66 of the General Laws and state records retention requirements. |
| Effect | By not retaining call log data for the required time, DUA limits its ability to review and evaluate its call-handling performance, identify trends, and take corrective action to improve its service. This also adversely impacted our audit because we needed to revise the audit period, by preventing a complete and accurate review of the intended audit period, and ultimately, of DUA’s performance over time. |
| Recommendation | DUA should ensure that all call log data is retained for three years, in accordance with Section M02-08 of the Massachusetts Statewide Records Retention Schedule. |
In addition to the conclusions we reached regarding our audit objectives, we also identified issues not specifically addressed by our objectives regarding DUA’s processes for monitoring and verifying claimant work search activities and managing claimant complaints. The audit process was delayed due to DUA’s inability to timely identify and provide documentation supporting claimant complaints for our review. See Other Matters for more information.
Also, we asked DUA about its compliance with a corrective action plan created by ETA to address DUA’s overspending of approximately $2.5 billion in COVID-19 pandemic–related UI benefits. See Other Matters for more information.
Table of Contents
- List of Abbreviations
- Overview of Audited Entity
- Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
-
- DUA mismanaged the oversight of its call center’s performance by not establishing performance standards or monitoring procedures to ensure timely responses to claimant telephone inquiries, leading to significant call wait times.
- DUA failed to meet the federal Employment and Training Administration’s timeliness standards for claimant first benefit payments.
- DUA violated Section 62A(a) of Chapter 151A of the Massachusetts General Laws by failing to provide in-person assistance at three of its regional offices.
- DUA violated Section 8 of Chapter 66 of the General Laws and state records retention requirements.
-
- DUA violated federal regulations by not completing the required number of Benefit Accuracy Measurement program claim reviews.
- DUA did not ensure that claimants met weekly work search requirements.
- DUA mismanaged claimant complaints, impacting its ability to ensure timely and consistent service.
- DUA did not complete all actions in its corrective action plan regarding approximately $2.5 billion that it overspent in Unemployment Insurance Pandemic Benefits.
Downloads
-
Open PDF file, 1.6 MB, Audit Report - Department of Unemployment Assistance (English, PDF 1.6 MB)