Transcript Highlights:

• The Single Audit Act of 1984 established requirements for audits of states, local governments, and tribal
• Audit findings discovered as a result of our audit procedures are communicated to agency management in
• The single audit is presented to the full Legislative Joint Auditing Committee meeting annually, usually
• Audit findings discovered as a result of our audit procedures are communicated to agency management in
• The single audit is presented to the full legislative joint auditing committee meeting annually, usually

Summary: The Medicaid Subcommittee of the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee met to adopt the November 2018 minutes and receive a primer on the subcommittee’s role and Medicaid oversight in Arkansas. Legislative audit staff reviewed the subcommittee’s history and explained that Medicaid is audited annually through the statewide single audit because it is a high-risk federal program. Staff summarized recent audit findings, including weaknesses in eligibility and data-matching controls, improper use of Medicaid funds for partially non-Medicaid work, issues with incarcerated juveniles’ coverage, the absence of a Medicaid recovery audit contractor program exception request, reporting problems involving MFCU recoveries, and provider eligibility documentation concerns. Staff also noted a DHS departmental audit finding involving employees who improperly received benefits, which was referred for further action. The Department of Human Services gave an overview of Medicaid’s structure, eligibility, delivery systems, and budget. DHS described Arkansas Medicaid as covering about 850,000 people through fee-for-service, managed care, and premium assistance for the expansion population, and outlined major spending categories such as institutional care, long-term services, pharmacy, capitated payments, and supplemental payments. DHS also explained the difference between state plan amendments and waivers, and said it has a beneficiary-fraud unit that refers cases to local prosecutors. The Office of Medicaid Inspector General described its role in detecting and preventing fraud, waste, and abuse, distinguishing between suspensions for credible allegations of fraud and recovery actions for mistakes or overpayments. OMIG said it works with DHS and law enforcement, issues quarterly and annual reports, and has increased recoveries in recent years. The Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit explained that it prosecutes provider fraud criminally and civilly, can also handle long-term care neglect, abuse, and exploitation cases, and works with local prosecutors as special deputies. Committee members asked about court venue, provider suspensions, beneficiary fraud, education of providers, and the status of Medicaid expansion work requirements; DHS said it is preparing to implement community engagement requirements under HR 1 and will begin with a soft launch before full enforcement. No formal votes were taken beyond adoption of the minutes, and the meeting adjourned after questions were answered.

Transcript Highlights:

• Audit Division.
• audit division you know you hear audit audit division you know you hear audit you<00:37:54.880><
• controls audits, and we do some IT audits.
• audit.
• Audits, the legislature has a couple ways of producing audits.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met on January 16, 2025, for an organizational and informational session. Members and staff introduced themselves, and Chair Jim Nash reviewed committee expectations, including that nonpartisan staff are to be used for factual information rather than political arguments. He also noted the committee rules were a blend of prior chairs’ rules and would be posted without a vote. Helen Roberts of House Fiscal gave a high-level overview of the committee’s jurisdiction and budget structure. She explained that the State Government Finance Committee oversees funding for major administrative agencies, the legislature, constitutional offices, and several boards, councils, and commissions. She emphasized that the committee’s general fund base for fiscal years 2026-27 is about $1.31 billion, less than 2% of the state general fund, and that the largest pieces are the Department of Revenue, the legislature, and pension aids. She also described how all-funds presentations differ from general fund views, highlighting internal service funds such as Minnesota IT Services, Department of Administration services, and other chargeback or reimbursement arrangements. Members asked questions about House and Senate budgets, debt service related to the Capitol Area building project and move costs, and how Minnesota IT Services is funded through fee-for-service chargebacks. Colby Sullivan of House Research then summarized a memo in the packet that outlines the entities within the committee’s jurisdiction and the constitutional and statutory provisions governing them. He pointed members to the memo as a reference and noted that the committee also has jurisdiction over the Legislative Coordinating Commission, the legislative auditor, the legislative reference library, the reviser of statutes, the Secretary of State’s budget and certain duties, and three gambling-related agencies, though gambling policy itself is generally handled by another committee. He offered to help members with bill drafting and amendments and to provide a linked electronic version of the memo. The Office of the Legislative Auditor then began an overview of its work. Legislative Auditor Judy Randall explained that the office is nonpartisan, serves all 201 legislators, and provides oversight through financial audits, program evaluations, and special reviews focused on state funds. She distinguished the Legislative Auditor from the State Auditor, noting that the State Auditor is an elected constitutional officer who focuses on county and local government funds. Randall said the office would also present a deep dive into its November performance audit of the Minnesota State Lottery. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the executive director of capital procurement services. president and chief financial officer for
• <00:15:42.560> capital executive director of uh capital executive director of uh capital procurement
• I also have the pleasure of serving as the university’s chief procurement officer.
• also have the pleasure of serving as the university's<01:25:29.280> chief<01:25:29.520> procurement
• university's chief procurement officer. university's chief procurement officer.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:55 Approval of Minutes 00:02:01 Information Items 00:02:10 Review of Executive Branch Agency Plans 00:02:20 A. A. Eastern Kentucky University 00:02:48 B. B. Kentucky Community and Technical College System 00:15:21 C. C. Kentucky State University 00:31:43 D. D. Morehead State University 00:41:44 E. E. Murray State University 01:01:56 F. F. Northern Kentucky University 01:16:09 G. G. University of Kentucky and Hospital 01:25:00 H. H. University of Louisville 01:42:52 I. I. Western Kentucky University 01:56:17, 958, all

Summary: The meeting opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by a roll call establishing a quorum. The committee then approved the prior meeting’s minutes. Members were reminded to silence cell phones, and the chair noted an informational item on capital plan amendments made by state agencies during the latest revision period before moving to university capital plan presentations. Eastern Kentucky University President David McFaden outlined EKU’s enrollment growth, strong Kentucky student retention, and signature programs in nursing, occupational therapy, criminal justice, education, manufacturing engineering, and aviation. EKU’s main capital priorities were a new health innovation project to support a proposed osteopathic medical program, including a $50 million escrow requirement until accreditation; a collaborative center for health innovation to address outdated health sciences facilities; a $5 million startup request for an air traffic control program; aircraft upgrades for the aviation fleet; and continued asset preservation funding. In response to questions, EKU said roughly 40% of the new health facility would be dedicated to the medical school, with shared simulation space for multiple health programs, and that aviation maintenance needs are currently being met through KCTCS partners but could be expanded if demand grows. KCTCS representatives then described the system’s scale and capital needs, noting service to 107,000 students, extensive dual credit and workforce training, and a network of 342 buildings across 70 campuses. They said prior legislative support, including $277 million in asset preservation and $90 million released for approved projects, had helped with safety, roofs, energy efficiency, and campus security. Their current priorities include about $30 million for systemwide safety and security upgrades, renovations tied to consolidation and footprint reduction under Senate Joint Resolution 179, and broader asset preservation needs estimated at roughly $300 million to $325 million. Members discussed the need to preserve and expand skilled trades training, and KCTCS said its plan includes construction trades and flexible, multiuse facilities that can adapt to changing workforce needs. No votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes, and the presentations concluded with questions and discussion only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee's Initiative 900 performance audits by the
• The audit identifies The audit identified 52 CARES programs led by a fire agency, as shown on this map
• I appreciate the audit and the audit work.
• Audit.
• I want to start by saying that when I read the audit and the description of um, The audit and the description

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee’s Initiative 900 subcommittee held a hybrid public hearing on two State Auditor performance audits. The first audit examined efforts to reduce non-emergency use of emergency systems through CARES programs. Auditors reported that Washington has 52 fire-agency-led CARES programs in 26 counties, but many communities without programs said they need one. Major barriers included unstable funding, difficulty hiring qualified staff, volunteer-based rural departments, and lack of statewide guidance. The audit also found that only about half of programs tracked both required performance measures, and it recommended that the legislature consider private insurance reimbursement options and convene a statewide work group to develop guidance, standards, and possible changes to the role of the Department of Health. Agency representatives and fire officials largely supported the findings and emphasized that short-term grants and one-year contracts make programs hard to sustain. Committee discussion focused heavily on financing, especially Medicaid reimbursement and accountable communities of health (ACHs). Auditors clarified that the 10% figure cited in the report referred to direct Medicaid reimbursement for treat-and-refer services, which some agencies do not pursue because the $115 rate is too low relative to the administrative effort. Several fire officials testified that their programs rely on grants and ACH support, but that funding is often year-to-year and uncertain. They also described the value of CARES programs in reducing emergency room use, jail detentions, and long ambulance wait times, while noting barriers to sharing patient records across systems. Members asked whether the new public safety sales tax authority could help, but fire district representatives said it is not a direct funding option for them. The second audit reviewed performance management in the Department of Commerce’s Office of Economic Development and Competitiveness. Auditors found that the division does not yet have a statewide economic development strategic plan and that performance management is inconsistent across its 16 programs. In a limited review, all six sampled programs had goals, but only half clearly identified performance measures and targets, and only three tracked outcomes and published results. The audit highlighted leading practices from other states, including strategic planning, regular progress reporting, aligning program goals with agency goals, and using performance-based contracts and grant monitoring. Recommendations urged Commerce to seek stakeholder input, assess internal and external conditions, set goals and measures, align programs with the strategy, and strengthen monitoring and evaluation. Commerce officials agreed with the audit and said the division is already working toward a strategic plan, with a new assistant director to be hired and a target of completing the work by mid-next year. Members pressed the department on how the plan would connect to workforce, higher education, housing, and other economic development systems, and asked Commerce to return to JLARC next year with progress updates. The meeting ended with instructions for submitting written public comments and notice of the next JLARC meeting schedule.

Transcript Highlights:

• Even though we don't audit municipalities routinely, I am over them to make sure they're getting audited
• So that's how we're tackling municipal audits.
• And have never ever had an audit period.
• So that'll all be available audits.
• And I feel aren't getting their audits.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think the audit is really good.
• And I think the audit is really good.
• Oftentimes we do these oversight requests or ask for these audits, and then the audit report comes and
• As part of this audit, and it wasn't part of our audit objectives or scope, we did not audit the judicial
• During our audit period, we selected three counties as required by that audit.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee held an oversight hearing on the state auditor’s October 2024 report on California’s Forensic Conditional Release Program (CONREP) for sexually violent predators. Members and witnesses discussed public safety, the long delays in finding community housing, the role of local housing committees, and the Department of State Hospitals’ oversight of Liberty Healthcare, which operates much of the program. Several legislators from rural and high-desert districts said their communities have been disproportionately affected by placements and questioned why many placements end up in remote areas. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found that CONREP participants were convicted of new offenses less often than sexually violent predators who were unconditionally released, but that 18 of 56 participants had been revoked and returned to state hospitals for noncompliance. He said it took an average of 17 months to place current participants in the community, with 20 additional people awaiting placement for an average of 20 months, and that the program incurred significant pre-placement costs. Parks also said local officials were often unclear about their role, DSH had not given clear guidance at the time of the audit, and California lacks a transitional housing option used in some other states. He reported that DSH had implemented four of the five audit recommendations, while declining the recommendation to explore state-owned transitional housing. DSH Director Stephanie Clendendon and Liberty representative Ken Carabello defended the program as a court-ordered, highly supervised treatment model intended to reduce reoffending and support reintegration. They said DSH is actively involved in placement review, that Liberty searches countywide under statutory restrictions, and that community feedback and court approval are part of the process. DSH said it has now implemented guidance for housing committee designees, formal program reviews, an outcome tracker, and an analysis of whether to separate some Liberty services into different contracts. DSH continued to oppose transitional housing, arguing it would not solve the core siting and statutory problems and would add cost. Several members remained critical, arguing the program is broken, costly, and unfairly concentrated in certain communities, and some called for major statutory changes or suspension of the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• Audits.
• audits.
• the audit.
• the audit questions.
• audit.

Summary: The committee first adopted its 2025-26 rules on a 7-0 roll call, then approved three consent items—AB 88, AB 240, and AB 313—on a due-pass motion to Appropriations. The hearing then moved to AB 648, which would give community college districts the same zoning authority as the UC and CSU systems to build student and staff housing on property they own or lease. The author and supporters argued the bill would help address severe housing insecurity and homelessness among community college students, while opponents and some members raised concerns about local control, zoning exemptions, and the impact on nearby communities. AB 648 passed the committee on a 5-2 vote and was sent to the Local Government Committee. The committee next heard AB 466, which would require California Community Colleges and CSU campuses to provide organ and tissue donor registry information during student orientation, and request UC campuses to do the same. Supporters shared personal stories about transplants and donation, saying college orientation is a good opportunity to increase registrations. Some members worried about information overload during orientation and suggested campuses have flexibility in how they present the material, but the bill advanced on a unanimous 7-0 vote to Appropriations. AB 326 followed, proposing campus-by-campus external audits of the CSU every three years and public release of the audits. The author, faculty supporters, and a student argued that systemwide audits do not provide enough transparency about how money is spent at individual campuses, citing examples of financial mismanagement and fee increases. CSU opposed the bill, saying it already conducts annual consolidated external audits and that campus-level audits would add cost without added benefit. After extensive discussion about transparency, audit scope, and implementation, the bill passed 6-1 to Appropriations. The committee then took up AB 335, which would create a California Black-Serving Institution Grant Program to support Black student success and broader underserved student services; supporters emphasized persistent equity gaps and low completion rates, while an opponent argued the bill needed to be carefully amended to comply with Proposition 209 and equal protection requirements. The transcript ends during that item’s discussion, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And from the first audit to the third audit, have we seen any compliance?
• So we audit at four. Well, altogether, we have 10 campuses. So we audit at four.
• Hearing the testimony today from the audits, this is the third audit.
• different things than the audit, but the audits never lie, you know.
• These audits help us do that.

Summary: The joint hearing of the Select Committee on Native American Affairs and the Joint Legislative Audit Committee focused on the University of California’s compliance with NAGPRA and CalNAGPRA and the return of Native American human remains and cultural items. Senators and Assembly Members opened by emphasizing the sacredness of repatriation, the ongoing trauma caused by delayed returns, and the need for stronger systemwide accountability. The State Auditor presented the third audit of UC’s repatriation efforts, concluding that UC still lacks the urgency, oversight, and clear timelines needed to promptly return remains and belongings. The audit found thousands of remains and hundreds of thousands of cultural items still in UC custody, new undisclosed collections at several campuses, weak budgeting and underspending, and repatriation plans that often lacked concrete deadlines. The auditor recommended stronger UCOP oversight, performance metrics, proactive searches for undiscovered items, and possible legislative action to tie funding to measurable progress. UC officials responded that the system is committed to full compliance and has accelerated its work since adopting a new policy in 2022. UC Provost Catherine Newman said the system repatriated more than 2,800 ancestors and nearly 80,000 funerary belongings in the past year, and that UC now says 80.3% of Native American remains are either repatriated or available for repatriation. UC announced a new systemwide plan to complete repatriation of human remains by the end of 2028, to finish high-risk campus reviews by June 2026, to recall all loans by January 2026, and to require quarterly reporting to UCOP. UC also said it will spend an additional $8.8 million over three years, expand staffing, improve databases, support tribal consultation costs, and identify potential reburial sites on UC land. Berkeley and San Diego described increased staffing, consultations, and repatriation activity, while Santa Barbara said it had corrected earlier omissions, notified tribes about previously unreported ancestors, and was working toward completing repatriations and updated inventories. Committee members pressed UC on why progress has been so slow, why the audit’s timelines differed from UC’s public reporting, and whether the 2028 goal applies only to human remains rather than all cultural items. UC said the 2028 target is for human remains, while cultural items will take longer, and acknowledged that more work remains. Members also asked about the technical expertise needed for repatriation, the role of tribal experts, and whether repatriation should be embedded more permanently in UC governance or statute. Tribal leaders and representatives then testified that remains and belongings were taken without consent and must be returned with tribal consent and leadership. They criticized the repeated delays, stressed that tribes are the experts on their ancestors and cultural heritage, and urged UC to treat repatriation as a top priority and to return all associated items, not just human remains, so ancestors can truly rest.

Transcript Highlights:

• audit process. audit process.
• So with the audit, how would the audit be conducted?
• per day per audit. per day per audit.
• >> per audit. >> per audit.
• do an audit. do an audit.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Single Audit Act of 1984 established requirements for audits of states, local governments, and tribal
• The Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 extended the statutory audit requirement to nonprofit organizations
• Audit findings discovered as a result of our audit procedures are communicated to agency management at
• Audit findings discovered as a result of our audit procedures are communicated to agency management and
• The single audit is presented to the full Legislative Joint Auditing Committee meeting annually, usually

Summary: The Medicaid Subcommittee of the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee met to receive a primer on the subcommittee’s history and on how Medicaid oversight works in Arkansas. Legislative audit staff reviewed the subcommittee’s origins in response to earlier Medicaid audit concerns and explained that Medicaid is audited every year in the statewide single audit because it is a high-risk, large federal program. Staff summarized recent audit findings, including issues with eligibility controls, data matching, contractor charging, incarcerated juveniles’ coverage handling, provider eligibility support, and the state’s Medicaid recovery audit contractor exception request. They also noted a DHS departmental audit finding involving employees who improperly received benefits, which was referred for possible prosecution. The Department of Human Services gave an overview of the Medicaid program, describing eligibility groups, delivery systems (fee-for-service, managed care/PASSE, and premium assistance for expansion adults), the size of the program, and the agency’s budget and provider base. DHS also outlined the difference between state plan amendments and waivers and said other committee materials would be sent to members. The Office of Medicaid Inspector General described its role in detecting and preventing fraud, waste, and abuse, explaining that it investigates suspected intentional fraud, suspends providers when there is a credible allegation of fraud, recovers improper payments in mistake cases, and recommends policy changes when trends are identified. The Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit explained that it prosecutes provider fraud criminally and civilly, handles neglect, abuse, and exploitation cases in long-term care settings, and works with DHS, OMIG, and federal partners. Members asked about where cases are filed, how provider suspensions work, whether beneficiary fraud is investigated, and how education is provided to providers. DHS confirmed that beneficiary fraud cases are referred to local prosecutors and said the expansion population will move toward community engagement/work requirements under federal changes, with a soft launch planned before full implementation. The meeting ended with no formal votes beyond adoption of the prior minutes and no other committee actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Office Performance Audits.
• Big comments and big questions about the audit or policy, we'll let us... ...about the audit or policy
• , IT Systems Assistant Audit Manager.
• OSPI determined ...system, which is the focus of our audit.
• And as a reminder, we meet as a committee of the Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee to hear audits

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The committee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on OSPI’s school apportionment system, which distributes K-12 funding to districts. Auditors said the system and its underlying 2008-era infrastructure are outdated, unstable, inefficient, and at high risk of errors or failure. They also found weak controls over data input, documentation, oversight, and monitoring, with heavy reliance on a small number of staff and vendor knowledge. In limited testing of three districts, the system calculated 2023–24 funding correctly, but auditors identified small discrepancies between state budget inputs and underlying statutory language and said broader system risks remain unresolved. JLARC members asked about the scope of the district testing, whether smaller districts face greater risk, the meaning of the funding discrepancies, and whether the system could support a future change to a simpler per-student funding formula. Auditors said the discrepancies were small but could compound into millions statewide, and that the audit did not evaluate broader policy questions or alternative system owners. They recommended OSPI modernize or replace the system and address current control weaknesses while the new platform is developed. OSPI officials largely agreed that the current platform needs replacement and said a feasibility study completed in 2024 found the system at catastrophic risk of failure. They clarified that the Legislature had approved up to $16 million in the state IT pool for the project, but that funding is released through gated oversight and not all of it had yet been appropriated for the current biennium. OSPI disputed the auditor’s characterization of some rounding and budget-law issues, saying the calculations were consistent with agency rules and legislative inputs, and explained that some manual workarounds are used to handle newer statutory requirements. One member of the public testified in support of modernizing the system and strengthening controls. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This came out of the Management Audit Committee. So is there anybody from Management Audit here?
• management audit here? management audit here?
• Anybody from management audit? Anybody from management audit?
• audit began to click uh at that point. audit began to click uh at that point.
• auditing this time. auditing this time.

Bills: HB0086

Keywords: county officials, election code, misconduct, removal, government accountability, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• performance audits.
• We conducted this audit because I-1163 requires our office to audit the state's long-term in-home care
• This is our ninth audit in the series.
• We conducted this audit because 1163 requires our office to audit the state's long term in home care.
• We appreciate the opportunity to learn from the results of this audit and are pleased that the audit

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s Office performance audit of Washington’s Restoring Quality Home Care Initiative (I-1163). Auditors said the initiative’s background checks and 75-hour training requirement are widely viewed as safety measures, but the state lacks pre-2011 data to directly measure safety outcomes. They also found Washington’s long-term care workforce is still short, though the state ranks better than many others in workers per disabled person, and that some groups and regions have larger gaps between authorized and actually used Medicaid care hours, suggesting access problems for certain clients. The audit focused heavily on the certification process for home care aides. Auditors reported that many applicants never finish certification, that the process often exceeds the 200-day legal deadline, and that delays can cause lost income, job loss, and in some cases repeated employer changes that allow aides to keep working without becoming certified. They recommended that the Department of Health accept applications only after training and testing are completed, move testing into training programs more broadly, and eliminate redundant DOH verification of FBI background checks. Committee members asked about testing contract incentives, language access, and the role of immigration in workforce shortages; auditors said they found no financial performance standards in the Prometric contract, did not specifically study immigration status, and did not focus on language barriers in this audit. Department of Health and Department of Social and Health Services officials largely agreed with the audit’s findings and recommendations. They said they have already made improvements, including expanded in-program testing, more staffing, and rule changes, and that testing has been integrated into more than 110 training programs. DSHS noted testing is offered in 13 languages. Both agencies said they support further streamlining and expect continued collaboration, including possible budget or legislative requests. No public testimony was offered, and the committee adjourned without taking any vote or formal action on the audit.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:42:57.720> manager clinch and I'm a senior audit manager clinch and I'm a senior audit
• findings from our 2019 Financial audit findings from our 2019 Financial audit report<00:45:27.880
• the current status of Prior audit the current status of Prior audit observations<00:49:47.359>
• Anything else on this audit?
• <01:12:11.000> adjustments unadjusted items or audit adjustments unadjusted items or audit

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on February 21 and first approved the January 30 minutes and the consent calendar, with item 2540 removed by the Department of Education and item 25057 set aside for discussion. The committee then took up FIS 25057, a Department of Transportation request tied to a federal grant for building information modeling and related data standardization across DOT systems. Transportation officials explained that the $2.405 million consultant-heavy request would connect surveying, design, construction, and asset management systems, improve efficiency and long-term asset tracking, and help the department catch up with other states. Several senators questioned the lack of immediate, quantifiable budget savings and the reliance on consultants, but the item was ultimately adopted. The committee next approved FIS 25054 for the Department of Health and Human Services after questioning a $16 million shortfall in the Children’s Health Insurance Program. DHHS explained the variance as a budgeting and accounting issue tied to separating CHIP from Medicaid managed care, pandemic-era continuous enrollment, and the new federal requirement for 12 months of continuous coverage for children. Members also approved a Cannon Mountain fee item, where park officials described a proposed price freeze for early-bird passes, a new in-season tier, and modest increases in off-season pricing, while noting operating cost pressures, strong snow conditions, and favorable customer value ratings. That item was adopted unanimously. The committee also approved the Department of Corrections item after discussion of staffing, retirement eligibility, overtime, and recidivism. Commissioner Helen Hanks said retirement-eligible staff had declined slightly, recruitment was improving, overtime hours were down, one housing floor had been closed because of lower population, and the department had reduced reincarceration by 8% over seven years, which she said produced substantial savings. The item was adopted. During informational items, the committee heard a Legislative Budget Assistant performance audit of the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights. The audit found the commission inefficient and ineffective in processing complaints, with average case closure taking 840 days, significant backlogs dating back decades, expired administrative rules, weak management controls, disorganized and outdated procedures, unreliable data, and unresolved prior audit findings. The audit included 25 recommendations, two of which may require legislative action. Commission staff said they appreciated the recommendations and expected the additional resources from the prior budget cycle to help address the backlog and improve transparency and efficiency.

Transcript Highlights:

• Office Performance Audits.
• And Sonia Singh, IT Systems Assistant Audit Manager.
• OSPI determined ...system, which is the focus of our audit.
• That’s just not something we could tackle in a system audit like this.
• And as a reminder, we meet as a committee of the Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee to hear audits

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on the accuracy and reliability of OSPI’s school apportionment system. Auditors said the system, which calculates and distributes K-12 funding using multiple feeder systems and a core apportionment engine, is outdated, unstable, inefficient, and at high risk of failure. They reported weak controls over data input, documentation, oversight, and staffing, and said OSPI relies heavily on manual workarounds, a few knowledgeable staff, and vendor support. In limited testing of three districts, the auditors found the system calculated funding correctly for the 2023-24 school year, but they identified nine small input discrepancies tied to differences between budget materials and state law, which they said could compound into larger dollar amounts. The auditors recommended replacing or modernizing the system and noted that delays in doing so prolong risk. OSPI largely agreed that the current platform needs replacement and said it has been working toward a new system for years. Agency officials clarified that the Legislature requested a feasibility study in 2022, that the study found the system at risk of catastrophic failure, and that funding for a replacement is now in the state IT pool subject to OCIO/OFM gate reviews. OSPI disputed the audit’s characterization of the rounding and budget-law discrepancies, saying the issue was an agency rule and implementation choice, not an error that caused under- or over-allocation. Officials also said the current system is too old to easily absorb future formula changes, but that the planned replacement should be flexible enough to handle a new funding model if the Legislature adopts one. Committee members asked about the amount and timing of the $16 million project funding, whether smaller districts face greater risk, how many times data is entered, and whether the funding formula should be simplified. Auditors and OSPI both emphasized that formula simplification is a policy question for the Legislature, not the audit. Public testimony came from one online witness, who urged full implementation of the audit recommendations and modernization of the system. The subcommittee took no formal vote and adjourned after the presentations and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not read audits. We do not analyze audits. DRRA just collects audits.
• So receiving audits, collecting audits, analyzing audits...
• <00:14:06.924> [snorts] audits. We do not read audits. [snorts] audits.
• financial audits. financial audits.
• <00:33:42.880> that's their audits, they have an audit that's their audits, they have an audit

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we have 23 years of unfiled audits with Legislative Audit. That's pretty serious.
• And if we've received audits or not received audits, or have we required?
• They would have an audit report.
• Audit, then yes, a request to audit would have to go through our executive committee.
• But it was audited by the state? No, sir. It was Meyer and Ward CPAs. Oh, okay. Private audit.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, as far as the audit is concerned, it's both a financial and a performance audit.
• A performance audit would be whoever conducts the performance audit; it would still be a performance
• audit.
• So, um, is the audit conducted by the same audit? Yes, um, yes, it is.
• and not a financial audit per se.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The meeting covered several Senate resolutions related to the University of Hawaiʻi system, the East-West Center, and related education and workforce issues. On SCR 178 and SR 48, testifiers strongly supported the East-West Center, describing it as an important Hawaii asset that promotes cultural exchange, global citizenship, diplomacy, and ties to the University of Hawaiʻi. Speakers said the Center has helped train leaders and bring international connections and investment to Hawaii, and they urged continued funding despite federal cuts. The chairs then recommended passage with technical amendments, and both resolutions were adopted by the committees. The committee also heard testimony on resolutions calling for audits of University of Hawaiʻi operations. On SR 32 and SCR 50, the University of Hawaiʻi said it supported the resolution and had already begun work on establishing a Bachelor of Science in nursing at the UH Maui campus, with additional staff available on Zoom to answer questions. On SR 160 and SCR 142, which sought a financial and performance audit of UH Mānoa facilities, UH Athletics said it already undergoes annual financial audits required by NCAA bylaws but not performance audits, and discussed its internal evaluations, contingency planning, and efforts to address concerns raised by student athletes and staff. The committee then took up SCR 138 and SR 55, requesting a management and performance audit of the UH Office of the Vice President for Academic Strategy. Vice President Deborah Halbert and P20 Director Steve Shotz said they did not oppose the audit and believed it could provide clarity, while explaining that the office is relatively new and works collaboratively across campuses on articulation, transfer, grants, and workforce alignment. They described grant programs including Perkins, GEAR UP, preschool development, and data-sharing efforts, and said they are focusing more resources on teaching, health care, and skilled trades. The discussion also touched on SR 54, a proposed performance audit of the UH Foundation, where foundation representatives said they already undergo annual financial audits, acknowledged some donor communication issues, but emphasized improved stewardship and growth in fundraising over recent years.

Transcript Highlights:

• I had to sign for that audit. I had to sign for that audit.
• Well, don't they do private audits and then send the audit over to the state? Yes, sir.
• So we have 23 years of unfiled audits with Legislative Audit. That's pretty serious.
• They would have an audit report.
• Legislative Audit, then yes, a request to audit would have to go through our Executive Committee.

Summary: The committee began with prayer and approval of the January 8 minutes, then received updates on delinquent private water and sewer reports. Staff reported that for the 2022 reports, 19 of 43 entities had had their turnback reinstated, while 24 remained in escrow; for the 2023 reports, 59 of 64 entities had filed, leaving five outstanding. The committee also filed a report on Adona, where staff said the city had made enough progress toward substantial compliance with municipal accounting laws to discontinue withholding turnback, and the committee adopted that recommendation. The bulk of the meeting focused on municipal accounting noncompliance cases. Gum Springs and Denning were presented with extensive repeat findings involving budgets not adopted by ordinance or resolution, missing or incomplete bank reconciliations, inadequate receipts and disbursement records, payroll issues, and improper handling of Act 833 funds or other city money. Both cities’ mayors and recorders-treasurers testified about efforts to correct records, obtain training, and work with the Municipal League; the committee voted to start the 60-day turnback-withholding clock for both and then filed the reports. Fargo was deferred because no city representative was present. Additional reports included Green Forest, Elaine, Strong, Brooklyn, Mineral Springs, Rondo, Waldo, Columbia County, and several private water and sewer entities. Strong drew significant concern over missing garbage-bag revenue, improper fund transfers, and deficit balances; the committee deferred that report to the March meeting. The committee also heard investigative or referred reports on the Faulkner County Fair Association, Brooklyn payroll direct-deposit fraud, and other entities with questionable disbursements or recordkeeping. In several cases, staff recommended filing the reports after responses were received; in others, the committee deferred action when responses were lacking or representatives were absent. The meeting ended with a motion to defer a Cross County Rural Water matter so the entity could appear at the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• There were 200 audits last year, I think three hospitals in Kentucky were audited, and the audits don't
• There were 200 audits last year, I think three hospitals in Kentucky were audited, and the audits don't
• There were 200 audits last year, I think three hospitals in Kentucky were audited, and the audits don't
• There were 200 audits last year, I think three hospitals in Kentucky were audited, and the audits don't
• There were 200 audits last year, I think three hospitals in Kentucky were audited, and the audits don't

Keywords: 00:00:00 Call to Order/Roll Call 00:01:19 Discussion of 25RS HB 785 00:30:25 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 785 00:32:15 Discussion of 25RS HB 61 00:36:42 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 61 00:38:07 Discussion of 25RS HB 788 00:51:01 Discussion of 25RS SB 14 01:11:09 Discussion of 25RS HB 685 01:44:57 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Health Services met with a quorum and took up House Bill 785, as amended by a committee substitute that combined language from HB 785 and HB 787. The bill was described as addressing Medicaid managed care organization (MCO) audits, provider contract notice and amendment procedures, mental health parity compliance, and related transparency requirements. Supporters said the measure would tighten notice to providers, limit repeated contract amendments and rate reductions, require more standardized audit procedures, and add reporting on Medicaid claims, appeals, and grievances. It also includes a provision requiring coverage of at least two evaluation-and-management billable services per physician per recipient per date of service, and a section addressing narcotic/opioid treatment program licensing and reimbursement language. Testimony in support came from Representative Kim Moore, John Inman of BrightView Health, Michelle Sandborne of the Children’s Alliance, and Kelly Cormic of RYSE. They argued that MCOs often use audits and recoupments in ways that are burdensome, opaque, and financially damaging to providers, especially smaller and rural ones. They cited examples of multiple audit requests in short timeframes, large record requests with short deadlines, delayed or absent feedback, and recoupments taken before appeals are resolved. They also said parity laws are not being consistently enforced and that the bill would give the Department of Insurance authority to suspend or revoke an MCO certificate of authority for willful or repeated parity violations. Committee members generally expressed support for provider protections and transparency, while asking for clarification on the narcotic treatment and E/M billing provisions. Tom Stevens of the Kentucky Association of Health Plans testified in opposition, saying the bill is complex to implement and should be handled through the broader Medicaid oversight work of House Bill 9, the MOAB. He said the issues raised were better suited for that bipartisan stakeholder process and noted the committee substitute had not yet been fully reviewed by his group. After discussion, the committee adopted the committee substitute and then moved to a vote on the bill; the roll call began, with several members recorded as voting yes, but the transcript cuts off before the final vote result is shown.