Audit of the Hampden County Probate and Family Court Register’s Office Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

An overview of the purpose and process of auditing the Hampden County Probate and Family Court Register’s Office

Overview

In accordance with Section 12 of Chapter 11 of the Massachusetts General Laws, the Office of the State Auditor has conducted a transition audit of certain activities of the Hampden County Probate and Family Court (HCPFC) Register’s Office for the period January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2020.

We conducted this transition audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

Below is a list of our audit objectives, indicating each question we intended our audit to answer, the conclusion we reached regarding each objective, and where each objective is discussed in the audit findings.

Scroll to see more

Objective	Conclusion
Does the current internal control plan (ICP) of the HCPFC Register’s Office contain all eight components of the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission’s (COSO’s)1 enterprise risk management framework, as required by the Office of the Comptroller of the Commonwealth’s (CTR’s) Internal Control Guide?	No; see Finding 1
Did HCPFC track conservatorships in accordance with Section 5-418(a) of Chapter 190B of the General Laws, HCPFC’s Decree and Order of Appointment of Conservator, and the Massachusetts Trial Court’s “Best Case Practice for Failure to File a Conservator Account”?	No; see Finding 2
Did HCPFC track guardianships in accordance with Sections 5-209(b)(6) and 5-309(b) of Chapter 190B of the General Laws and the Trial Court’s “Judicial Best Case Practice for Failure to File an Adult Guardianship Care Plan Report”?	No; see Finding 3

To achieve our audit objectives, we gained an understanding of the HCPFC Register’s Office’s internal control environment related to the objectives by reviewing the office’s policies and procedures, as well as conducting inquiries with the office’s staff members and managers.

To obtain sufficient, appropriate audit evidence to address our audit objectives, we conducted the following procedures.

ICP

To determine whether the ICP of the HCPFC Register’s Office contained all eight components and 17 principles of COSO’s enterprise risk management framework, as required by CTR’s Internal Control Guide, we reviewed the office’s most recent ICP, which was in effect during our entire audit period and had been created by the prior Register of Probate. We used the “Internal Control Plan Checklist” section of CTR’s Internal Control Guide and analyzed the HCPFC Register’s Office ICP to determine whether all eight components and 17 principles were present.

Conservatorships

To determine whether the HCPFC Register’s Office tracked conservatorships in accordance with Section 5-418(a) of Chapter 190B of the General Laws, HCPFC’s Decree and Order of Appointment of Conservator, and the Trial Court’s “Best Case Practice for Failure to File a Conservator Account,” we obtained a list of all conservatorships that had active ticklers² in MassCourts³ during the audit period. Using Audit Command Language (ACL) software, we selected a nonstatistical, random sample of 40 conservatorship case files from the population of 342 on this list. We examined the case files to determine whether conservators filed the following required documents: an inventory of the estate, due 90 days from qualification date (the date a judge declares a conservator qualified); an initial account,⁴ due 15 months from qualification date; and annual accounts for calendar years 2019 and 2020. If the required initial or annual accounts were not in a case file, we examined the hearing notice to determine whether a show cause hearing⁵ was scheduled. In addition, we looked through all the case files that did not have initial or annual accounts to determine whether a guardian ad litem had been assigned to investigate each case.

For this objective, we used nonstatistical sampling methods and could not project the results of our testing to the population.

Guardianships

To determine whether the HCPFC Register’s Office tracked guardianships in accordance with
Sections 5-209(b)(6) and 5-309(b) of Chapter 190B of the General Laws and the Trial Court’s “Judicial Best Case Practice for Failure to File an Adult Guardianship Care Plan Report,” we obtained a list of all guardianships that had active ticklers in MassCourts during the audit period. Using ACL, we selected a statistical sample, with a 95% confidence level, a 5% tolerable error rate, and a 0% expected error rate, of 60 guardianship case files from the population of 2,901 on this list. We examined the case files to determine whether guardians filed the following required reports: an initial care plan report (generated for incapacitated adults⁶ and due 60 days after a guardian is appointed) and annual care plan reports for calendar years 2019 and 2020. If the required care plan reports were not in a case file, we examined the hearing notice to determine whether a show cause hearing was scheduled. In addition, we looked through all the case files without care plan reports to determine whether a guardian ad litem had been assigned to investigate each case.

Data Reliability

We obtained a list of all conservatorship and guardianship cases that had active ticklers for annual reports due for the period January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2020. To confirm the completeness and accuracy of the list, we traced a sample of 20 case numbers from the list to the case files and traced a sample of 20 case numbers from the case files back to the list. In addition, we conducted tests to identify any duplicates to determine the integrity of the information on the list. We determined that the data on the list were sufficiently reliable for our audit purposes.

1.    According to its website, COSO was formed by a group of five professional associations and provides “thought leadership dealing with three interrelated subjects: enterprise risk management (ERM), internal control, and fraud deterrence.”

2.    A tickler is a notification in MassCourts, created by the staff when a conservator or guardian is appointed and the associated docket is filed, to remind the court that a required document should be submitted based on the date entered by the staff (the conservator’s or guardian’s qualification date). When the required document is submitted, the staff member updates the docket with the submitted document and creates a new tickler for the next date a document needs to be submitted (the next anniversary of the qualification date).

3.    MassCourts is a statewide, comprehensive case management system for the electronic filing of civil cases, criminal complaints, warrant processing, docketing, scheduling, management reporting, and related civil and criminal fees and fines.

4.    According to Section 5-418(c) of Chapter 190B of the General Laws, “An account shall state or contain: (1) a listing of the balance of the prior account or inventory, receipts, disbursements and distributions during the reporting period and the assets of the estate under the conservator’s control at the end of the reporting period; (2) a listing of the services provided to the protected person; [and] (3) any recommended changes in any conservatorship plans as well as a recommendation as to the continued need for conservatorship and any recommended changes in the scope of conservatorship.”

5.    At a show cause hearing, the respondent is required to appear before a judge to explain why the respondent did not fulfill an obligation or take a certain action. In the Probate and Family Court, the respondent explains why a required document was not filed, and the respondent is ordered to provide the document.

6.    A guardian of an incapacitated adults has to file a care plan report within 60 days of appointment; a guardian of a child does not.

Date published:	June 24, 2022