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 Pioneer Valley Transit Authority (PVTA) for the period October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2021.
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 and the conclusion we reached regarding each objective.
|
Objective |
Conclusion |
|
Yes |
|
Yes |
To achieve our audit objectives, we gained an understanding of PVTA’s internal control environment related to the objectives by reviewing applicable agency policies and procedures, as well as conducting inquiries with PVTA’s employees and management. We evaluated the design of controls over ADA‑required paratransit services and ADA paratransit complaints.
We performed the following procedures to obtain sufficient, appropriate audit evidence to address the audit objectives.
On-Time Performance
- To determine whether PVTA delivered ADA-required paratransit services on time in accordance with Section B of the Performance Standards section of PVTA’s Paratransit Operating Procedures Manual, we first analyzed 100% of the trips conducted during the audit period. Our population consisted of 195,746 total trips, with 172,676 trips conducted by National Express Transit and 23,070 trips conducted by MV Transportation.
- We then separated the population of trips into 24 months and divided them into groups by the two paratransit contractors. One group consisted of the first 21 months of the audit period, in which the National Express Transit Corporation was PVTA’s contractor, and another group consisted of the last 3 months of the audit period, in which MV Transportation was PVTA’s contractor. We selected a random, nonstatistical sample of 10 months, comprising 7 randomly selected months from the National Express Transit Corporation group and all 3 months from the MV Transportation group.
- To determine whether PVTA accurately calculated and identified trips with riders who were picked up late, using the data we extracted from ADEPT, we calculated the percentage of late trips for each day during the sampled months and compared the results to PVTA’s ADA On-Time Performance Reports. We then reviewed the contracts between PVTA and each contractor to verify that the percentage of late trips was acceptable according to contract requirements.
ADA Paratransit Complaints
To determine whether PVTA resolved all ADA paratransit complaints from riders in accordance with the “American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Concern/Complaint Policy & Resolution Procedures” on its website, we stratified our population of 63 ADA paratransit complaints submitted during the audit period into two strata. Stratum one consisted of the 50 complaints where the investigation was completed within five calendar days. Stratum two consisted of the 13 complaints where the investigation was completed after more than five calendar days. We selected a random, nonstatistical sample of 10 complaints from stratum one and all 13 complaints from stratum two.
- For our sample from stratum one, to determine whether PVTA investigated and resolved these complaints in accordance with its policy, we reviewed each complaint in PVTA’s Feedback System to determine whether PVTA sent an acknowledgement letter to the complainant and whether the investigation was completed and reported back to PVTA’s customer service manager within five calendar days.
- For stratum two, we reviewed the information in PVTA’s Feedback System to determine whether there were documented reasons that these complaints were not resolved within the required timeframe.
- For all 23 complaints in our sample, we also determined whether PVTA sent decision letters to the complainants within seven calendar days and whether remedial actions were recommended for the complaints.
When using nonstatistical sampling, we could not project the results to the entire population.
Data Reliability
To determine the reliability of the data in ADEPT, we verified selected information system controls (access controls, security management, configuration management, contingency planning, and segregation of duties). We conducted interviews with PVTA officials who had knowledge about the data and verified the completeness and accuracy of the ADEPT ADA-required paratransit trip data by testing the data for missing and duplicate records, as well as records outside of the audit period. We compared the ADA-required paratransit service rides conducted during the audit period to the complete list of PVTA-approved ADA-required paratransit riders to determine whether all rides were provided to approved riders. We traced the ADA-required paratransit applications to the list of PVTA‑approved ADA-required paratransit riders and then traced from the list of PVTA-approved ADA-required paratransit riders to the ADA-required paratransit services applications. We analyzed a sample of 20 routes for a specific day and filtered and sorted by time of day to determine logical progression. We also compared the number of trips to the number of trips in the performance reports compiled by PVTA to assess contractor penalties. To determine whether PVTA calculated a 20-minute pickup window, we tested the application controls.
To determine the reliability of the data in PVTA’s Feedback System, we verified selected information system controls (access controls, security management, configuration management, contingency planning, and segregation of duties). We also verified the completeness and accuracy of the complaint data by testing the data for missing and duplicate records, as well as records outside the audit period. We tested the complaint data from PVTA’s Feedback System for gaps in the case identification numbers and followed up on instances of inconsistencies in the numbering to verify that there were no deleted complaints.
As a result of these procedures, we found the data were sufficiently reliable for the purpose of our audit objectives.
Conclusion
Our audit revealed no significant instances of noncompliance that must be reported under generally accepted government auditing standards.
| Date published: | March 17, 2023 |
|---|