Audit of the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

An overview of the purpose and process of auditing the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind.

Overview

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 Massachusetts Commission for the Blind (MCB) for the period January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2021. We expanded the scope of our review to include evaluations performed in calendar year 2019 (before the audit period and the 2019 coronavirus [COVID-19] pandemic).

We conducted this performance 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, if applicable, where each objective is discussed in the audit findings.

Objective	Conclusion
Does MCB license and train applicants to the Vending Facilities Program (VFP) in accordance with Sections 3.04, 3.05, and 3.06(6) of Title 111 of the Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR)?	No; see Finding 1
Does MCB perform routine evaluations of the vendors and their facilities in VFP as required by 111 CMR 3.11 and 3.12(2)?	No; see Finding 2

To achieve our objectives, we gained an understanding of the internal controls we determined to be relevant to the objectives by reviewing MCB’s policies and procedures, as well as conducting interviews with MCB staff members and management.

To determine whether MCB licenses and trains VFP applicants in accordance with 111 CMR 3.04 and 3.05, and whether each vendor provided a signed agreement to MCB in accordance with 111 CMR 3.06(6), we reviewed all 28 (100%) of the hardcopy vendor files of vendors that were active during the audit period. We determined whether there was written documentation that each vendor had successfully completed VFP’s initial training course; and whether there was a written, dated license issued for each vendor during the audit period.

To determine whether MCB performs routine evaluations of the vendors and their facilities biannually, as required by 111 CMR 3.11, and follows up with evaluation scores of less than 75, as required by 111 CMR 3.12(2), we reviewed all 28 of the hardcopy vendor files. During our review of the files, we noted that MCB completed only one evaluation during the audit period. We expanded the scope of our review to include evaluations performed in calendar year 2019 (before the audit period and the COVID-19 pandemic) that were included in the vendors’ files to determine whether MCB performed evaluations twice a year. We reviewed these evaluations and vendor files to determine whether each vendor received a passing score of 75 or more and, if not, whether there was written evidence of follow-up for corrective action taken by MCB VFP staff members in the vendor files.

Date published:	December 16, 2022