Audit of the Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

An overview of the purpose and process of auditing the Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association

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 the Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association (MSA) for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2020.

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 where each objective is discussed in the audit findings.

Objective	Conclusion
Did MSA develop a uniform reporting calculation model and format for “Total Operational Spending per Inmate” reports submitted by all sheriffs’ offices as required by its final budgetary language for fiscal years 2018, 2019, and 2020?	No; see Finding 1
Did MSA establish policies and procedures for the standardization of services and programs for the sheriffs’ offices as required by its final budgetary language for fiscal years 2018, 2019, and 2020?	No; see Finding 2

 

To achieve our audit objectives, we gained an understanding of the internal controls that we determined to be relevant to the objectives by reviewing MSA’s policies and procedures and conducting interviews and walkthroughs of the reporting process with key personnel, including a selection of the sheriffs’ chief financial officers (CFOs). Additionally, we performed the procedures described below.

To determine whether MSA had developed a uniform reporting calculation model and format for documenting the cost per inmate (CPI) at each sheriffs’ office, we obtained from MSA’s current executive director the “Total Operational Spending per Inmate” report template for each of the two separate models that sheriffs’ offices can use to determine CPI: a single CPI model and a double CPI model. The single CPI model requires sheriffs’ offices to calculate CPI by dividing the total operational spending by the average daily number of inmates. The double CPI model requires sheriffs’ offices to calculate CPI by dividing the adjusted operational spending, which is the total operational spending minus the costs unrelated to inmate care, by the average daily number of inmates. Our population consisted of 39 “Total Operational Spending per Inmate” reports, submitted during fiscal years 2018 through 2020 by 13 of the 14 sheriffs’ offices. (The population of 39 represented 1 report from each of the 13 offices for each year of the three-year audit period; we excluded Nantucket County because it does not house incarcerated individuals.) We reviewed all 39 reports to determine whether they followed the format MSA established in consultation with the state Executive Office for Administration and Finance.

To determine whether MSA developed policies and procedures for the coordination and standardization of services and programs that the sheriffs’ offices offer, we obtained and reviewed all active policies and procedures in place at MSA during our audit period.

Data Reliability

To determine the reliability of data from the “Total Operational Spending per Inmate” reports, we interviewed current MSA management personnel to gain an understanding of the reports and how they were compiled. We met with the CFOs from four of the sheriffs’ offices to obtain an understanding of how the CFOs completed, and submitted to MSA, the “Total Operational Spending per Inmate” reports; we determined that the reports were submitted by email. By requesting, obtaining, and reviewing all fiscal year 2018, 2019, and 2020 reports, we assessed the completeness of the reports submitted annually to MSA by the sheriffs’ offices. We reviewed a total of 39 “Total Operational Spending per Inmate” reports. We also verified, through a review of emails, that MSA had submitted the fiscal year 2018, 2019, and 2020 “Total Operational Spending per Inmate” reports it had collected to the executive offices to which it was required to send them based on its budgetary language.

Based on the results of these procedures, we determined that the information obtained for our audit period was sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our audit work.

Date published:	June 28, 2022