State Assessment of Internal Controls Final Report, May 2007
Download Guide in Word (1,622 KB) or PDF (676 3KB) format.
D. Maine
1. Review Team Process
Due to scheduling problems, Maine did not have a site visit. Training took place through a conference call. The Maine Project Team stated that it would have been helpful to have assistance at the beginning of the process to answer any questions face-to-face, but did not feel that the lack of a site visit, in general, was a hindrance to successfully completing the Instrument. Maine did stress the importance of reviewing the Instrument completely so that participating State staff understand all of the areas to be considered when completing the Instrument and who would be responsible.
The Maine Project Team read the information provided by Kansas and reviewed the Kansas Instrument prior to organizing its team and completing the Instrument. Once the core participants of the Maine Project Team identified all of the program areas, the project coordinator went to the Directors of all of the identified areas (HR, IT, etc.) requesting that they assign the appropriate staff. Maine did not have problems securing the staff resources needed to conduct this review.
2. Benefits of the Instrument
The Maine team considered the completeness of the Instrument to be a great strength. The Maine team thought that the Instrument was very helpful in identifying and addressing potential issues. Maine pointed out that the State Child Welfare program is now using the Instrument as part of an accreditation effort. The Human Relations (HR) representative stated that Maine is very proud of its Performance Evaluation System (PER) and he was therefore surprised to realize that the Maine PER did not contain integrity and ethical value components identified in the Instrument. He stated that the HR program would consider adding integrity and ethical value information during consideration for revisions during the next review cycle.
3. Changes to the Instrument
The Maine Project Team proposed the following changes to the Instrument:
- Revising the Instrument to reduce or eliminate redundancy; and
- Developing a verification or validation process to ensure that answers were accurate and appropriate.
4. Recommendations
Maine Project Team recommendations included:
- Allowing 90 days to complete the Instrument;
- Reviewing and updating the Instrument every year; and
- Applying the Instrument in other areas of the agency, such as child welfare.
Previous Page | Table of Contents | IV. Results of Additional Pilot States: Montana >>