Transcript Highlights:

• In 2024, we released 457 audits. Of those, 424 were county audits.
• In 2024, we released 457 audits. Of those, 424 were county audits.
• The 2025 audit reports, the ones that have already been released, we have 40 county audits that have
• So in 2024, we released 457 audits. Of those, 424 were county audits.
• The 2025 audit reports, the ones that have already been released, we have 40 county audits that have

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:19 Auditor of Public Accounts 00:01:07 Office of Secretary of State 00:10:22 Kentucky State Treasury 00:17:51 Office of Attorney General 00:28:50, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on General Government met for its first meeting and heard budget-related presentations from the Auditor of Public Accounts and the Secretary of State, with the Treasurer beginning a presentation at the end of the transcript. Auditor Allison Ball reviewed her office’s 2024 and early 2025 work, including hundreds of county and state audits, several special examinations, and ongoing reviews such as the kinship care funding issue, the Kentucky Department of Education audit, and the Jefferson County Public Schools audit. She said her office is focused on waste, fraud, abuse, and legal compliance, and asked the committee to consider future budget changes, including aligning her appropriation with restricted funding and restoring a stronger performance-audit function. She also highlighted audits that exposed serious problems, including the Department of Juvenile Justice review, and said those reports are intended to serve as models for other entities to avoid similar failures. Secretary of State Michael Adams said his office is self-sustaining through fees and does not need tax dollars, but asked for greater access to its own revenues and more flexibility in using them. He highlighted the Safe at Home address confidentiality program, saying recent changes expanded protections for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking, and that the program has grown rapidly while remaining funded by offender fines. Adams also urged lawmakers to again adjust county election funding for inflation, noting the current per-voter and per-precinct amounts were set decades ago. In questioning, Representative Hart asked whether the Safe at Home program was self-funding; Adams replied that it covers only about 10% of its operating cost and said the best solution would be to let the office use more of the revenue it already collects rather than rely on tax dollars. Treasurer Martin Medcafe, introduced with staff member Russell Weber, praised the General Assembly’s fiscal discipline and described the Treasury’s work in managing state funds. He reported strong results from the Unclaimed Property Fund, saying the office returned $35.5 million to Kentuckians in its first year and $3.8 million in the first month of the current year, and said the State Investments Commission generated $682 million in returns last year. He also highlighted financial literacy efforts through the Kentucky Financial Empowerment Commission and said the Treasury is helping manage opioid settlement funds, which are now earning up to $200,000 per month through investment. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, that's where the audit comes in.
• Again, that's where the audit comes in.
• I was the supervisor on the audit.
• The audit says that may not be the case.
• Versace and his team who oversaw the audit, and obviously the institutions who were subject to the audit

Summary: The committee held an oversight hearing on a state audit examining California’s community college transfer process and whether streamlining it could improve access to bachelor’s degrees. Opening remarks from legislators emphasized that California’s transfer system is central to equity and workforce development, but that only about one in five transfer-intending community college students complete a transfer within four years. Members highlighted disparities by race, region, campus, and major, and pointed to confusion created by differing requirements across the UC, CSU, and community college systems, including limits and inconsistencies in the Associate Degree for Transfer (ADT), TAG, and major-specific prerequisites. State Auditor’s staff said the audit found that while UC and CSU systemwide enroll more transfer students than the Master Plan target, individual campuses and high-demand STEM programs often do not. The audit identified barriers including unclear and varying course requirements, limited counseling and education plans, insufficient counselor staffing at some campuses, and weak equity plans. It also found that many students never even apply because they do not accumulate enough units or cannot navigate the process. The auditor described examples where transfer students with strong preparation were denied at selective campuses and noted that articulation alignment across systems remains limited. Representatives from UC, CSU, and the Community Colleges responded that transfer remains a top priority and described ongoing reforms. UC cited a new public dashboard, data-sharing agreements, new transfer pathways, and an ADT pilot at UCLA, while saying campus-level capacity and program differences limit how much can be standardized from the system office. CSU said it admits more than 90% of eligible transfer applicants, is expanding transfer planning tools and direct outreach, and is implementing SB 640’s Transfer Success Pathway Program. Community Colleges said transfer reform must focus on clearer credit mobility, more consistent articulation, and broader ADT adoption. Members pressed the systems on inconsistent major requirements, the need for better coordination, and whether campuses are fully prioritizing transfer students; no votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• and collaborative effort during this audit cycle.
• approach and reported that empowering department managers to independently oversee operations and manage
• effectively managing their areas.
• the investigations manager I would say for PIP we had no idea until the audit report came out that there
• and as the investigations manager I would say for PIP we had no idea until the audit report came out

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee conducted sunset reviews for the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy, the State Board of Nursing, the Arizona Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners, and the Arizona Regulatory Board of Physician Assistants. The Auditor General’s reports praised each board for timely licensing in some areas but identified recurring problems with complaint investigations, public safety oversight, fee analysis, records/documentation, and internal controls. For Pharmacy, the main concerns were weak enforcement of controlled substances prescription monitoring program (CSPMP) requirements and slow complaint resolution; the board said it had implemented some recommendations, was pursuing a new database vendor, and supported legislation to strengthen CSPMP enforcement. For Nursing, the audit found a large and growing backlog of complaints and repeated delays in resolving cases; the executive director said the board was under-resourced and requested 28 additional investigative positions, while nursing stakeholders supported process reforms and cited a bill to improve timelines and fairness. For Occupational Therapy, the audit focused on missing or poorly documented fingerprint clearance card checks, delayed action on a serious criminal-charge disclosure, and other compliance issues; the board said it had accepted and was implementing all recommendations, including new procedures and rulemaking. For Physician Assistants, the audit found weak oversight by the executive director, extensive delays in complaint handling, and an incentive-pay system that did not align with key performance goals; the board said it had already made structural changes, was improving tracking and IT systems, and planned to continue implementing recommendations. After discussion and testimony from board officials, public members, and nursing stakeholders, the committee voted to continue the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy for six years until July 1, 2032, the State Board of Nursing for four years until July 1, 2031, the Arizona Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners for four years until July 1, 2030, and the Arizona Regulatory Board of Physician Assistants for a continued term with statutory changes (the transcript includes the board review and related discussion, but the final motion text for the physician assistants board is not fully captured in the excerpt). The votes on the first three continuations were approved by roll call, with members generally supporting continuation while expressing concern about complaint backlogs and the need for reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• audit to them.
• President, DOT is audited every year. When we do an audit, we're auditing to balance the books.
• When we do an audit, we're auditing to balance the books.
• audit?
• We're auditing a fiscal audit.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Fink in audit.
• There has been a private audit. Okay. So there has been an audit.
• audit.
• So when they have their private audit, do we review that audit?
• Legislative Audit?

Summary: The meeting opened with prayer and approval of the January 8 minutes, then moved to review of education audit reports. The first report concerned Northwest Arkansas Community College, which had three findings, including repeat internal control deficiencies that caused financial statement misstatements and a tuition revenue loss tied to a new student information system. College officials said the issues were largely misclassification and process problems, not missing money, and described corrective steps such as monthly closing checklists, approval controls for journal entries, cross-training, and efforts to address staffing turnover and fill finance vacancies. Members asked about the tuition issue, whether students were notified or billed, and whether the software problem affected other institutions; audit staff said they were not aware of the same scenario elsewhere. The committee then filed the report as reviewed. The next report was Cedarville School District, which had one finding involving $794 in improper credit card charges by a resigned elementary teacher. The district was reimbursed, a police report was filed, and the matter was referred to the Professional Licensure Standards Board; members asked whether any further action or license-related consequences were known, but staff said they were not aware of additional action. The report was filed as reviewed. The final finding was for West Memphis School District, where auditors reported repeat capital asset issues, including failure to capitalize about $851,000 in construction costs for a baseball-softball complex and problems with inventory and asset inspection. The superintendent said the district had recently begun using Legislative Audit after prior private audits, and described new controls such as multi-level purchase approvals, separation of duties, tagging of equipment, and a cleanup of old inventory records. Members also discussed the relationship between private audits and Legislative Audit reviews, with staff explaining that private audit reports for public school districts still come before the committee and that the executive committee determines when Legislative Audit performs an audit. The committee filed the West Memphis report as reviewed and noted that 28 school districts had no findings before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, basically for many years I've been on a Legislative Audit Commission, where we see during the audits
• administered by the Department of Administration through its Office of Grants Management.
• administered by the Department of Administration through its Office of Grants Management.
• of Grants Management. of Grants Management.
• Hayes, could you please, one, talk about grants management and grants as contracts.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3672, authored by Representative Quam, and the bill was laid over. Quam said the measure is based on findings from past Legislative Audit Commission audits and is intended to clarify state requirements, strengthen agency compliance, and address gaps such as conflicts of interest in grant administration. He said he wants the auditor to work directly with the revisor and agencies so the rules are clearer and less likely to be misunderstood. Betsy Hayes, Assistant Commissioner with the Department of Administration, testified that sections 5 through 11 of the bill would strengthen grants management authorities, reporting, monitoring, training, and conflict-of-interest limits, and said those changes are generally supported and in some cases already reflected in policy. She raised concern about section 3, saying it could sweep too broadly by applying chapter 16B grants-management requirements to all state payments to non-state entities, including procurement payments, which could create fiscal impact and regulatory overlap. She said the department is working with the author, the Office of the Legislative Auditor, and Auditor Randall to refine the language. Chair Clayburn asked for clarification on the difference between grants and procurement contracts and on the relationship between chapters 16B and 16C. Hayes explained that grants are typically reimbursement-based payments to third parties under chapter 16B, while procurement contracts are inward-facing state purchases under chapter 16C. She said section 3 could unintentionally capture procurement and apply grants rules to it. Clayburn said the bill’s intent is good and welcomed continued work on the language before the bill moves forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• um managed management supervision um managed logistics<00:05:03.360> company<00:05:03.680>
• that out again page seven of the audit that out again page seven of the audit report<00:13:15.440
• in which we looked at Grants management in which we looked at Grants management compliance<00:25
• manage of management of required in the manage of management of Grants<00:26:33.200> so<00:26:
• 57.120> Management<00:26:57.720> Systems Electronic grants management systems.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee held its first meeting on February 10, 2025, with member and staff introductions and opening remarks from Chair Kristin Robbins about the committee’s bipartisan mission to address state fraud and improve oversight of executive branch spending. Robbins said the committee would focus on both legislation and informational oversight hearings, likely in coordination with standing policy committees, and emphasized concerns about reported fraud in state government and the need to prevent waste before it occurs. Members from both parties generally expressed support for the committee’s work and interest in learning more about the issues. The sole agenda item was a presentation from the Legislative Auditor on the 2023 report, “Oversight of State-Funded Grants to Nonprofit Organizations.” Legislative Auditor Judy Randall and Deputy Legislative Auditor Jodi Munson Rodriguez explained that the report reviewed how comprehensive Minnesota’s grants management policies are and how well agencies follow them. They said the policies cover the grant lifecycle but often lack detail, and the office found widespread noncompliance in recent years. The presentation included examples such as limited standards for progress reports, flexible monitoring requirements, and no required timeline for closeout reviews. The auditors also noted that state agencies spent an average of about $514 million annually on nonprofit grants from fiscal years 2018 through 2022, with about 2,400 nonprofit organizations receiving grants. The auditors said several factors contribute to compliance problems, including inconsistent funding for grants management, limited training, and uneven use of electronic grants systems. They also noted that statutes gave little authority to enforce compliance. Since the report was released, the Department of Administration has taken some steps, including changes to pre-award financial review policies and a timeline for closeout reviews, but the auditors said other recommendations remain only partially implemented. No votes were taken and no bills were acted on at this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• During our special audit, the first audit that we did, there was information that was potentially privileged
• and the performance audit.
• This audit began in April 2023 and wrapped in April 2024.
• some of the other audit recommendations.
• some of the other audit recommendations.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Joint Natural Resources and House Natural Resources, Energy and Water Committees of Reference heard the Arizona Auditor General’s sunset review of the Arizona State Veterinary Medical Examining Board. The audit found the board generally met some licensing requirements, but it did not timely investigate and resolve 49 of 159 complaints in fiscal year 2024, and it did not fully comply with conflict-of-interest disclosure and filing requirements. The Auditor General also identified weaknesses in continuing-education verification and other sunset-factor areas, and the board agreed to implement all 21 recommendations. Board staff said complaint volume has risen sharply since the pandemic, that the board’s process is slower because every case goes through an investigative committee and then the full board, and that it has already corrected some conflict-of-interest issues and is adding tools to improve continuing-education audits. The committee then heard testimony from the board’s executive director and from the Arizona Veterinary Medical Association. The executive director emphasized the board’s public-protection mission, described the shortage of veterinarians and veterinary technicians, and said the board is working to improve efficiency through a new e-licensing system and staff training. Members asked about the shortage of large-animal veterinarians, complaint backlogs, and whether the board could do more to recruit rural practitioners; the board said it lacks direct recruiting authority but supports multiple licensure pathways and loan-assistance efforts. The veterinary association supported the board’s oversight and said it is also working on rural and large-animal workforce issues through partnerships and advocacy. The committee then voted to recommend continuing the board for eight years, until July 1, 2034. The committee next took up the Arizona State Land Department, beginning with the Auditor General’s presentation on the department’s sunset review and prior special audit. The audit found the department had not updated its required five-year disposition plan since 2011, had sold more than 48,000 acres without an active plan, had allowed agricultural rental rates to go unchanged since 2006 despite market increases, and had not consistently inspected mineral-related leases or properly managed reclamation bonds. The Auditor General said these issues created risks of lost revenue, reduced transparency, and public-safety hazards, and recommended 18 corrective actions in the main review plus 34 additional recommendations on other issues; the department agreed to most recommendations but declined to adopt a written policy for commissioner-initiated land sales. Commissioner Robin Sahid said the department is working through audit recommendations, has created a rules team, improved its customer portal, and is pursuing new policies on water use, transportation-basin leases, and disposition planning. Members questioned the department about agricultural leases, groundwater valuation, the Fondomonte leases and reimbursement for improvements, the canceled Coyotes land auction, backlog and processing times, and the use of consultants and administrative funds. The commissioner said the department had over 2,000 applications in queue when she arrived, that it has made progress reducing the backlog, and that it is conducting stakeholder outreach on water-efficiency standards and lease addenda. No final vote on the land department continuation was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• MANAGER WITH OFFICE WOULD PRESENT THE RESULTS OF THIS AUDIT.
• THE 22/23 AUDIT REPORT HAS NOT BEEN FILED YET.
• ARE ONES WHO TURN THEIR AUDIT AND ALL THOSE ARE ONES WHERE THE AUDIT HAS COME IN.
• IN A NOTE FINANCIAL AUDIT OF THE DEPARTMENT.
• HOW OFTEN STATUTORILY IS THE AGENCY AUDIT? >> THEY HAVE THIS AUDIT EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to hear from Jamie Holshear and Ted Waller, audit managers with the Auditor General's office
• I am the audit manager over district school boards, financial, federal, and operational audits.
• She is the audit manager over college, university, financial, and operational audits.
• Financially speaking, these are some of the findings that concern me the most as the audit manager.
• I'm the audit manager over college and university audits.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee received a presentation from Auditor General staff on recurring findings from audits of district school boards, colleges, and universities. For school districts, the main issues discussed included missing or outdated safe-school officer training documentation, weak purchasing-card controls, vendor banking-change fraud risks, incomplete background screenings and disqualification-list procedures, missing website budget disclosures, excessive or untimely IT access, late deactivation of former employees’ access, missed emergency drill deadlines, inaccurate capital outlay and resiliency education records, weak tangible property inventories, adult education reporting errors, untimely bank reconciliations, and improper use of workforce development funds. The auditors said many of these issues are repeated from prior years and are summarized in their annual report on significant findings and financial trends. For universities and colleges, the auditors highlighted similar control weaknesses, including vendor information change controls, IT access issues, cash and investment reconciliation problems, purchasing and procurement deficiencies, personnel and compensation issues, and student fee compliance concerns. Specific examples included a UF consulting contract totaling about $6 million, FAU underreporting carry-forward balances by about $77 million, UCF’s payment loss of about $107,000 from an email scam tied to vendor changes, and a North Florida College unauthorized transfer involving a few hundred thousand dollars. The committee asked questions about the UF consulting work, the FAU carry-forward issue, and whether the listed findings meant every named entity had every issue; auditors clarified that the lists reflected entities with findings in those categories, not necessarily each specific problem. The committee then turned to enforcement for entities with long-standing uncorrected audit findings. Staff reported 144 entities with 197 findings repeated in three or more successive audit reports and recommended sending letters requesting updated corrective-action status, including for late-filed 2022-2023 reports where appropriate. The committee approved the staff recommendation and directed letters to be sent. The meeting ended with members emphasizing the importance of audit oversight and taxpayer accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fink in audit.
• There has been a private audit. Okay. So there has been an audit.
• audit.
• So when they have their private audit, do we review that audit?
• Audit is going to do the audit of the school, then we're going to do the audit of the school.

Summary: The committee opened with prayer, approved the January 8 minutes, and then reviewed education audit reports. The first report concerned Northwest Arkansas Community College, which had two findings: repeat internal control deficiencies that caused material misstatements in the financial statements, and a tuition revenue loss tied to a Workday system issue that failed to charge some students after drop-add changes. College officials said the problems were misclassification and process issues rather than missing funds, described corrective steps including checklists, monthly closing procedures, and approval controls, and attributed some issues to staffing turnover and the Workday implementation. Members asked about accountability, staffing, and whether students should have been billed; the report was filed as reviewed. The next report was Cedarville School District, where auditors found improper personal credit card charges of $794 by a former elementary teacher. The employee reimbursed the district, and the matter was referred to law enforcement, the prosecuting attorney, the attorney general, and the Professional Licensure Standards Board. Members asked whether any licensing action would follow, but staff said they were only aware that no further action had been taken by the board. The final finding was for West Memphis School District, which had a repeat capital assets issue involving failure to capitalize $851,000 in construction expenditures for a baseball-softball complex, along with other asset-recording and inspection discrepancies. The superintendent said the district had recently begun using Arkansas Legislative Audit for the first time after previously using a private CPA firm, and described new controls such as multi-level purchase approval, tagging, separation of duties, and inventory cleanup. Members questioned why the district had not been audited publicly before and how private audits are handled; staff explained that private audits are still reviewed and findings come before the committee. The report was filed as reviewed. The meeting ended with notice that 28 school districts had no findings and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:03.119> done the LCC has a financial audit done the LCC has a financial audit done
• , this clean audit possible.
• and that makes this audit possible, this clean<00:03:59.040> audit<00:03:59.439> possible.
• Uh so we got performing the audit.
• with management. with management.

Keywords: 1183, house

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've become very focused on issues of audits and departure in the latest of those audits.
• We've become very focused on issues of audits and departure in the latest of those audits, and we've
• of the audit, providing that the audit-related concerns of Senator Arrington are consistent.
• of the audit, providing that the audit-related concerns of Senator Simon are considered.
• of the audit, providing that the audit-related concerns of Senator Martin and Representative G.

Summary: The Legislative Auditing Committee heard several local-government audit requests and unanimously approved each one. The first item was Baker County, where county commissioners asked for an operational and financial audit because of repeated late audits, concerns about the finance office, and lack of confidence in county financial reporting. The county clerk supported an audit but argued it should be countywide and include all constitutional officers; she also described a dispute over access to the county finance system and pending litigation. After brief questions, the committee adopted a 9-0 motion directing the Auditor General to perform an operational audit of Baker County’s financial operations and records, with scope to be finalized during the audit. The committee then approved an audit request for the Concord Estates Community Development District in Osceola County. Senator Arrington said residents alleged excessive board compensation, large unexplained spending, missing financial reports, and refusal to provide records or hold open meetings. Residents and a board member testified about rising assessments, deteriorating amenities, and lack of transparency. The committee voted 10-0 to direct an operational audit of the CDD. It also approved, by 10-0 votes, operational audits of the town of Melbourne Beach, based on allegations of fiscal and operational improprieties and lawsuits that had cost the town more than $150,000, and the city of Apalachicola, where Senator Simon said longstanding water utility failures, grant issues, and consent-order problems warranted review. The final request was for a financial and operational audit of Cape Coral’s Building Department. Representative G. Lombardo said building-fee revenues appeared to be transferred for non-building purposes, permit processing was inconsistent, and the department relied heavily on a private firm while the building official had prior ties to that firm. Industry representatives testified that building funds were being diverted, service levels were suffering, and private-provider inspections were not always reflected in fee reductions. The committee adopted the motion 10-0. After completing all agenda items, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:08:45.519> uh even know that there's an old audit uh even know that there's an old audit
• Once they get over the audit, they're shell-shocked, and then if they can forget about the audit too,
• Once they get over the audit, they're shell-shocked, and then if they can forget about the audit too,
• I'll just go in the audit.
• further audits. further audits.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first accepted the minutes from the April 4 meeting, then moved to a discussion of potential audit topics and follow-up on prior performance audits. Christine Young, Director of Audits, and Jay Henry, performance audit supervisor, walked members through a spreadsheet showing the status of roughly 30 performance audit reports from the past 10 years, including the number of observations, whether agencies concurred, how many observations were fully addressed, and when each report was last updated. They explained that “fully addressed” only means the agency addressed the observations it agreed with, and that some reports include rejoinders when the audit office disagrees with an agency’s response. Members also discussed how some audits have been updated and others have not, including an example from the prescription drug monitoring program, which moved from the Board of Pharmacy/OPLC to HHS and was recently updated after staff contacted HHS. A major focus was the mental health workforce licensing audit, which was described as having little or no follow-up in the spreadsheet. Several members said this was especially concerning given the ongoing mental health crisis and argued that the committee should require a response. The committee agreed to start by sending letters to the chairs of the boards listed under that audit, asking the chair or designee to appear at the next meeting or respond in writing about what has been done and what remains unresolved. Members noted that the current process is voluntary and self-reported, which can lead to long delays or no response, especially for boards that meet only monthly and may have changed membership or leadership since the audit was issued. The committee also discussed other audit follow-up issues, including the liquor commission division of enforcement and licensing, which staff said was farther along than its percentage suggested, and a recently released human rights report that was not yet due for update. Members raised the possibility of using future budget reviews to ask agencies what they have done about old audit findings. In addition, the committee briefly discussed future audit topics, including a possible audit of local school districts related to special education, and staff explained that the statute allows the LBA to audit a limited number of non-state entities over a five-year period. The motion to authorize the chair and LBA to draft and send letters to the mental health workforce licensing boards passed by show of hands with one abstention. The next meeting was tentatively set for June 6 in State House 100, with staff to confirm the room and schedule.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee I-900 performance audits by the State Auditor's
• manager.
• and 39 critical infrastructure audits, for a total of 52 local audits.
• Starting with the local cybersecurity audit report audits, we completed seven local government audits
• I'm an IT security assistant audit manager on our cybersecurity audit team at the Washington State Auditor's

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee held a public hearing on the State Auditor’s Office cybersecurity performance audits for fiscal year 2025, covering both state agencies and local governments. SAO staff explained that the audits are conducted independently under Initiative 900 and are kept confidential at the entity level, with detailed findings shared directly with the audited organizations. They reported that state agency audits found nearly one-third of assessed safeguards fully implemented on all systems and 227 vulnerabilities across seven agencies, including three critical and 21 high-severity issues. For seven local government cybersecurity audits, nearly a quarter of safeguards were fully implemented on all systems, and auditors identified nearly 300 vulnerabilities, including nine critical and 47 high-severity issues. SAO also summarized its ransomware resiliency audits and critical infrastructure audits for local governments. In six ransomware audits, a little over 35% of assessed safeguards were not in place, while about 60% were at least partially in place. In 39 critical infrastructure audits, focused largely on water and sewer providers, auditors found over 260 vulnerabilities and said more than 10% were critical or high. Staff highlighted that these audits have led to improvements, including one vendor making security changes after SAO testing that were later echoed in a federal advisory. They also described related services such as cybersecurity checkups, policy guidance, and other cyber-related work by the office. Washington Technology Solutions’ state chief information security officer, Ralph Johnson, praised the audits and said they help protect essential public services. He cited a sharp national rise in ransomware incidents against governments and said Washington has used more than $11 million in federal and state cybersecurity grant funds for over 200 projects. In response to questions from Representative Scott, SAO and WOTEC discussed options for addressing urgent vulnerabilities, including compensating controls, grant funding, and low-cost mitigation steps. The committee also discussed how Washington’s program compares nationally, with Johnson saying Initiative 900 is unusually comprehensive and that local governments often seek audits voluntarily. No votes were taken, and the hearing adjourned after public testimony was offered but none was given.

Transcript Highlights:

• . management. management.
• any issues identified in our audit. any issues identified in our audit.
• management managers on grant management requirements,<00:47:27.599> policies,<00:47:28.400>
• , there's a audit finding by audit report, there's a audit finding by audit finding<00:48:21.119>
• > management.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• [snorts] Senate File 62, Legislature Reorganization of Department of Audit, sponsor Management Audit.
• [snorts] Senate File 62, Legislature Reorganization of Department of Audit, sponsor Management Audit.
• [snorts] Senate File 62, Legislature Reorganization of Department of Audit, sponsor Management Audit.
• [snorts] Senate File 62, Legislature Reorganization of Department of Audit, sponsor Management Audit.
• [snorts] Senate File 62, Legislature Reorganization of Department of Audit, sponsor Management Audit.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to hear from their audit of the DNR's management of Outdoor Heritage Fund grants, otherwise
• We're going to hear from their audit of the DNR's management of Outdoor Heritage Fund grants, otherwise
• Audit Division within the office. Audit Division within the office.
• then we get audited by the DNR.
• And if I recall right, and Mr. audit, the internal audit, you just grab audit, the internal audit, you

Bills: HF3564

Keywords: Greater Minnesota, regional parks, trails, grants, local government, 1183, house

Summary: The Legacy Finance Committee met to approve the prior meeting minutes and then heard a presentation from the Office of the Legislative Auditor on its performance audit of the Department of Natural Resources’ administration of Outdoor Heritage Fund grants. OLA explained that the DNR generally complied with the criteria tested, but the audit identified two main problem areas: grant payments and grant monitoring. The audit covered 13 grants, mostly legislatively named grants awarded in fiscal year 2020, and reviewed agreements, amendments, payments, monitoring, and some site visits. OLA reported that for three grantees, totaling about $400,000, invoices lacked enough detail to determine whether costs were allowable, and about $5,000 was paid to two grantees without sufficient supporting documentation. The auditors also said DNR lacked policies defining allowable costs and what “directly related to and necessary” means under state law. On monitoring, DNR missed required annual visits for six grants, made payments on current progress reports that were missing or not on file, and had weaknesses in closeout evaluations, including missing required elements, late completion, and two grants with no closeout evaluation at all. OLA recommended stronger documentation, clearer guidelines with the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, timely monitoring and closeout, obtaining progress reports before payment, and improved internal controls. Members reacted strongly to the findings, especially the repeated failures to follow grant procedures and the risks of legislatively named grants and advance payments. Representative Heintzeman and Vice Chair Skraba questioned whether the issues reflected broader problems in state grant oversight and asked about prepayments, follow-up, and whether more legislative action was needed. OLA officials said they do not rely on self-attestation, but instead retest agencies after 2 to 3 years, and noted a new annual update-report process that will track whether agencies implement prior recommendations. Judy Randall, the Legislative Auditor, said the laws and policies already exist and emphasized that the issue is ensuring agency staff follow them; she also said most recommendations in the recent update report had been implemented. No further committee action or vote was taken on the audit during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The audits call into question whether the department has the management systems and accountability measures
• , audit, we will be taking up audit 25-06, audit, we will be taking up audit 25-06, Department<00
• >> this audit or the next audit? uh for for >> this audit or the next audit?
• Um we we do take the audit the audit.
• at you. manager, when we were looking at the<01:04:49.440> audit<01:04:49.920> because

Keywords: 912, senate, all