Transcript Highlights:

• reports containing major recommendations, the audit report for the ...major audits and audit reports
• This is a collaborative effort to get this audit done. It is a large audit.
• audit.
• And this audit...
• dollars are exempted from single audits, so they're not audited under our federal single audit that

Summary: The committee met to receive a series of audit presentations, beginning with the statewide Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for fiscal year 2025. The State Auditor’s Office and OMB reported a clean, unmodified opinion for the state, with strong financial results including a $40.6 billion net position, $30.99 billion in assets, $1.81 billion in liabilities, and continued Legacy Fund growth. OMB also explained the new GASB 101 compensated-absences reporting change and discussed pension-liability fluctuations tied to discount-rate assumptions and investment performance. Members asked about how the state compares to others and about the effect of short-term commodity price swings, and OMB said the report reflects actual fiscal-year results rather than forecasts. The committee then heard the University System audit, which also received a clean opinion but included four findings: misreporting of Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund revenue, insufficient monitoring of service organizations at CTS, NDSU, and UND, improper bank reconciliations at Dakota College of Bottineau, Dickinson State, and Williston State, and investment/cash reconciliation problems at Bismarck State College related to bond proceeds. University officials agreed with the findings and said corrective actions were underway, including internal review of bank reconciliations. Members raised questions about NDSU’s use of certificates of deposit, and university staff explained that CDs are used to earn interest on funds being accumulated for future projects. Several other audits were presented, most with clean opinions and no findings, including the State Auditor’s Office, Workforce Safety and Insurance, Housing Finance Agency, Housing Incentive Fund, Job Service North Dakota, the Retirement and Investment Office, PERS, the Center for Distance Education, the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents, the Ethics Commission, and the Office of Administrative Hearings. Notable exceptions included a State Fair Association audit with an adverse opinion on the foundation component unit because its financial statements were not available for audit, and a Securities Department performance audit finding that performance-based pay increases and bonuses were issued without required evaluations. The committee also discussed the State Auditor’s future needs, including more staff capacity, data analytics, cybersecurity reviews, possible subpoena authority, independent legal counsel, and whether some audits—such as the Ethics Commission and State Fair—should be handled by independent third parties or under different statutory arrangements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, so the audit... the audit process itself has to be done The audit itself has to be done in
• Chairman, so if it's an audit that we've done, um, we do an audit, if we come back and do another audit
• of Audit and the Management Audit Committee.
• Having audit findings, there's nothing in statute that says having audit findings or uncorrected audit
• Audit committee is about fraud. Audit committee is about fraud. Audit committee is about fraud.

Keywords: 916, 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:

• 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:

• Welcome to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee I-900 performance audits by the State Auditor's
• It is a reminder that the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee hears the independent audits by
• For those audits, we have completed 83 critical infrastructure and nine ransomware resiliency audits.
• 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

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:

• statewide internal audit activities.
• , we need to perform an audit or we performed an audit, and they are referencing an evaluation of some
• audit over the last five years.
• produced 73 audits...
• Collectively, internal audit functions produced 73 audits last year.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The Joint Interim Committee on Legislative Audits met on June 17 for informational presentations. The Department of Administrative Services, through Chief Audit Executive Eli Ritchie, gave an overview of statewide internal audit requirements and the fiscal year 2025 report. He explained the difference between internal and external audit, described Oregon’s statutory and rule-based internal audit structure, and reported that 30 agencies had internal audit functions, with most meeting required standards. He said 73 audits and 49 advisory/consulting engagements were completed statewide, with strong compliance overall, though a few agencies were rebuilding audit committees after vacancies. No committee questions were raised after the presentation. The Secretary of State’s Audits Division then presented its Government Waste Hotline annual report. Director Steve Bergman and audit manager Olivia Rekhed described changes made to align the hotline with statute, including renaming it the Government Waste Hotline, creating a review panel, improving anonymity protections, removing fraud reporting from the hotline’s scope, and adjusting reporting timelines. They said hotline volume increased modestly in 2025, most reports were referred elsewhere or closed for insufficient evidence, and two reports were substantiated, including questioned costs of about $856 for personal use of a state vehicle and about $2.9 million tied to the Preschool Promise program. Committee members asked about hotline staffing, cost, anonymity, and follow-up on findings; staff said the hotline is lightly resourced, uses a contracted intake service, and referrals or recommendations are followed up through management letters and later reviews. The committee also heard an audit of the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department’s safety inspections and asset tracking. The Secretary of State’s office reported that OPRD had not consistently conducted or documented quarterly OSHA safety inspections and had incomplete asset records, including missing acquisition dates and costs for many assets. The audit made eight recommendations covering safety inspection policies, asset management guidance, tagging, reconciliations, disposition controls, training, and a new asset management system; OPRD agreed to all recommendations. OPRD officials said they had already begun training staff, improving inspection procedures, and working toward a replacement asset system, while noting operational challenges from a large, dispersed park system and manual processes. Committee members asked about what kinds of assets are tracked, how tagging works, whether items were actually being lost, and how much tracking is necessary for low-value tools; OPRD said the main issue was inconsistent classification and documentation rather than widespread loss. The meeting ended with no votes or formal actions taken.

Bills: HR1055, SB2170, SB1833, SB1198, HR1056, SB1730, SB563, SB1379, SB1645, SB2155, SB1280, SB1455, SB1456, SB1461, SB1457, SB1463, SB1465, SB1466, SB1344, SB1309, HR1054, SB2159, SB1948, HB1371, SB1365, SB1976, SB1975, SB2026, SB1565, SB1621, SB237, SB933, SB1427, SB1642, SB171, SB1873, SB2067, SB1623, SB1771, SB1805, SB1826, SB2072, SB444, SB2184, SB1966, SB1812, SB2117, SB2135, SB330, SB1239, SB1428, SB1531, SB1484, SB1405, SB3

Keywords: Oklahoma Agriculture Day, agriculture, farmers, ranchers, agribusiness, food production, wheat, cattle, beef, dairy, soybeans, cotton, poultry, pork, rye, rural economy, urban-rural, trade, commodity production, Oklahoma Department of Agriculture

Transcript Highlights:

• Bevan in audit objection. That'll be The order.
• Senate Bill 1645 clearly outlines how the Oklahoma healthcare Authority shall conduct audits to providers

Bills: HR1055, SB2170, SB1833, SB1198, HR1056, SB1730, SB563, SB1379, SB1645, SB2155, SB1280, SB1455, SB1456, SB1461, SB1457, SB1463, SB1465, SB1466, SB1344, SB1309, HR1054, SB2159, SB1948, HB1371, SB1365, SB1976, SB1975, SB2026, SB1565, SB1621, SB237, SB933, SB1427, SB1642, SB171, SB1873, SB2067, SB1623, SB1771, SB1805, SB1826, SB2072, SB444, SB2184, SB1966, SB1812, SB2117, SB2135, SB330, SB1239, SB1428, SB1531, SB1484, SB1405, SB3

Keywords: Oklahoma Agriculture Day, agriculture, farmers, ranchers, agribusiness, food production, wheat, cattle, beef, dairy, soybeans, cotton, poultry, pork, rye, rural economy, urban-rural, trade, commodity production, Oklahoma Department of Agriculture

Bills: SB1423, SB1426, SB1502, SB1377, SB1983, SB1466, SB1645, SB1647, SB1847, SB1565, SB1562, SB1329, SB1383, SB1833, SB1555, SB1344, SB1839, SB1280, SB1832, SB2001, SB1405, SB2143, SB1989, SB1393, SB1392, SB1395, SB1400, SB1220, SB1516, SB1239, SB1531, SB1349, SB1221, SB1538, SB1309, SB1434, SB2108, SB2121, SB2171, SB2061, SB2112, SB2138

Keywords: Oklahoma Hospital Advisory Council, hospital licensure, public health, State Department of Health, State Board of Health, hospital regulations, healthcare regulation, hospital standards, hospital construction, hospital operations, stroke care, stroke system, emergency medical services, EMS transport, psychiatric treatment, chemical dependency treatment, substance use disorder, drug storage, pharmacy, quality indicators

Transcript Highlights:

• next audit cycle, we had operational audits at six of the universities, our next operational audit cycle
• an audit.
• They do all have an audit chief audit executive.
• They do all have an audit chief audit executive.
• Is this a financial audit finding or is this an operational audit finding? You're recognized.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met to hear a presentation from the Florida Auditor General’s office on recent operational audits of four universities and to discuss how audit findings are handled. The Auditor General explained that financial audits occur annually and operational audits at least every three years, with universities required to respond in writing to findings; the office generally follows up in the next audit cycle, though it can audit sooner if needed. Members asked about accountability, whether findings are referred to other bodies, and how internal university audit functions interact with the state audit process. The chair emphasized the committee’s oversight role in ensuring public funds are used appropriately. The audit findings highlighted issues at New College of Florida, Florida A&M University, the University of Florida, and Florida Atlantic University. At New College, auditors cited invoice/payment errors, delinquent student account collection delays, prohibited extra compensation, exceeding state remuneration limits for certain employees, weak purchasing card controls, construction management cost documentation issues, and subcontractor licensing documentation gaps. At FAMU, auditors found investment accounting classification issues, delayed bank reconciliations, late vendor payments, and incomplete annual employee evaluations. At UF, auditors reported concerns over a $6.4 million consulting contract, event and catering spending, president’s office hiring and salary practices, bonus and relocation payments, continued high compensation after the president transitioned to another role, travel expenses including charter flights, and remote work agreements. At FAU, auditors found distance learning fee revenue exceeded allowable costs by about $2.8 million, carry forward funds were underreported by about $77 million, and credit card controls needed improvement. Members pressed the Auditor General on whether overpayments were refunded, whether any findings involved statutory violations, and what enforcement exists beyond the audit report. The auditor said some issues were corrected by the universities, such as New College recovering excess compensation from foundation funds, but others would be revisited in future audits; if potential fraud were identified, it would be referred to the state attorney’s office. The chair closed by noting that accountability for public spending rests with the Legislature and the committee, and the meeting adjourned without any vote or formal action beyond receiving the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• So agenda item one is the audit work plan, and then we will hear the performance audit on charter school
• This audit comes to us largely through some hotline requests received after our most recent audit, so
• we have conducted numerous audits through our performance audit function and our accountability audit
• audit objectives.
• There were so many audits being listed that I lost track of which ones had overlaps with JLARC audits

Summary: The committee meeting began with a brief explanation of the renamed Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee subcommittee, now called the Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits, and a presentation from the State Auditor’s Office on its current biennium performance audit work plan. The auditor described how topics are selected from a large pool of potential audits and highlighted several ongoing or planned audits, including the Liquor and Cannabis Board, oversight of authorized entities serving students with disabilities, the Quality Home Care Initiative, Medicaid managed care versus fee-for-service costs, the Housing Commission tenant ownership follow-up, DSHS vendor payment patterns, implementation of the Since Time Memorial curriculum, and the Washington State ferry system. Members asked about coordination with JLARC to avoid duplication, and the auditor said the offices exchange work plans, monthly updates, and quarterly coordination meetings. The committee then heard the State Auditor’s performance audit on how charter schools identify and support at-risk students. Auditors reviewed four charter schools—Catalyst Public Schools, Innovation High School, Pinnacles Prep, and Rainier Prep—and focused on English language learners, homeless students, and special education students. The audit found the schools met nearly all legal requirements reviewed, with only one area where two schools partially met a language-access requirement. The schools also used several promising practices, including small-group instruction, culturally responsive environments, and multi-tiered systems of support, though the auditors recommended better documentation of procedures to improve consistency. Families interviewed generally reported positive experiences, while noting resource constraints. Committee members asked about how the four schools were selected, whether the audit compared charter populations to home districts, and how MTSS requirements applied to the schools reviewed. The State Auditor’s Office said the sample was chosen for geographic diversity, student population characteristics, and representation from both authorizers, and that K-2 MTSS requirements were not evaluated because they applied to only one school. Representatives from the Charter School Commission and charter school advocates responded positively, emphasizing technical assistance, collaboration, and sharing best practices across schools. Two public testifiers also supported the report and said it highlighted effective practices that could be expanded across charter and traditional public schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• if<00:16:46.720> you doing the audit that the audit, if you doing the audit that the audit
• findings of the audit.
• > audit.
• . audits. audits.
• if an SAU audit is non-compliant. if an SAU audit is non-compliant.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• if<00:16:46.720> you doing the audit that the audit, if you doing the audit that the audit
• These audits.
• > audit.
• . audits. audits.
• if an SAU audit is non-compliant. if an SAU audit is non-compliant.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee met in executive session and reviewed several previously heard bills, but focused its discussion on SB 586 and SB 580. The chair explained that SB 586 would require school districts and school administrative units to publish audit reports after the fiscal year, and that an amendment, 1472H, had been prepared to replace the relevant audit/reporting section. The amendment would add SAUs to the reporting entities, expand the contents of audits to include items such as employee lists, pay, benefits, and pension liabilities, and change the timing so audits are submitted nine months after the fiscal year end, followed by a three-month Department of Education review and then a further correction period before any grant funding could be withheld. The amendment would also require the reports to be posted in searchable electronic form on the web. Committee members discussed whether the bill’s “non-compliance” language referred only to incomplete submissions or also to audit findings, and several members raised concerns about whether the Department of Education had the staff and authority to take on this role, whether the existing DOE25 process would be displaced, and whether the bill should instead remain with the Department of Revenue Administration. One member noted that the fiscal note anticipated the need for additional auditors and significant staffing costs. The committee also reviewed SB 580, described as a school cooperative purchasing program bill that also contains policy provisions for charter school trustees, school board members, and receivership-related language tied to Claremont. The chair said the committee had previously heard comments from Charlie Arlinghouse on the cooperative purchasing portion and would use a side-by-side comparison prepared by staff when it reached that bill. Other bills on the docket were briefly described but not taken up that day: SB 491, which has committee-requested amendments and a separate non-germane amendment related to curriculum frameworks and academic standards; SB 513, an owner’s project manager bill held as a possible vehicle for future non-germane language; and SB 531, concerning a cosmetology program in Coös County and a possible task force. The chair said the committee would not address 491, 513, or 531 that day and would return to 580 and 586.

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:

• 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:

• 2027 audit if it's adequate. 2027 audit if it's adequate.
• be exempt from audits.
• I mean, I think auditing bad actors, you know, audit bad actor every year.
• getting it audited every year, right? getting it audited every year, right?
• <01:19:01.600> Um, audits done. Um, audits done.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The informational briefing focused on the Office of the Auditor’s recent audit of Hawaii’s deposit beverage container program and the Department of Health’s response. State Auditor Les Condo reviewed the program’s structure, noting it was created to increase recycling and reduce litter, but said prior audits have repeatedly found weak internal controls, reliance on self-reported data, and an “honor system” approach. He cited examples of underreporting and overpayment risks, including a Whole Foods settlement and secret-shopper testing at a redemption center where the program reimbursed more than what was actually paid to consumers. Condo said the special fund continues to grow, increasing by more than $12 million between FY24 and FY25, and that the 2024 audit found no meaningful progress in implementing earlier recommendations. He also noted that many prior recommendations were later codified in law, including risk-based audits and internal control requirements, and said the office will audit the program again in about a year. Senator Fevella said the briefing was needed because he has seen little progress over the years and emphasized the program’s goals of reducing litter and promoting recycling. He noted that Hawaii has lost a glass recycler, underscoring broader challenges in the system. Department of Health Deputy Director Kathleen Hoe said the department is committed to addressing longstanding problems and said the director’s office meets with the program twice a month. Program staff outlined steps being taken to respond to the audit, including revising accounting and inspection/enforcement manuals, retaining third-party services, and implementing risk-based audits of distributors and redemption centers. They said internal control process documents from distributors were due June 30, with about 200 received and roughly 100 still outstanding, and that enforcement letters are being sent. The department also described plans for electronic reporting to reduce manual entry and improve accuracy, as well as a broader legislative proposal for a tiered audit system. Under that proposal, larger distributors would remain subject to the current every-other-year audit requirement, middle-tier distributors would be audited every five years, and smaller distributors would be exempt. Officials said the governor had temporarily waived enforcement of the 2025 independent audit requirement because of cost concerns for smaller distributors, while the department reviews submitted audits and considers a longer-term fix. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the informational briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislative Audit issued two reports for the audit of the state's financial statements.
• Legislative Audit issued two reports for the audit of the state's financial statements.
• The Single Audit Act requires that the audit of the state be conducted to meet five objectives.
• Okay, so the audit—that audit is in process right now.
• Was this the same firm that had been doing previous audits and had completed the 2022 audit that was

Summary: The committee met to adopt prior minutes and reports from its executive and standing committees, including counties and municipalities, educational institutions, and state agencies. Those reports covered routine audit activity, delinquent private water and sewer audits, municipal accounting compliance issues, education audit findings, and several state agency audit items. The committee also reviewed and adopted the State of Arkansas annual comprehensive financial report for fiscal year 2025 and the related single audit report, both presented by Legislative Audit staff. The state financial report showed unmodified opinions on the state’s financial statements and described total assets of about $41.9 billion and liabilities of about $11.1 billion, along with retirement system assets of $39.9 billion and a net pension liability of $9 billion. Two material weaknesses were identified: insufficient internal controls at the Office of State Technology to monitor threats and unauthorized access, and a Division of Workforce Services methodology change for unemployment-related estimates that was not properly documented or approved. The single audit covered $12.4 billion in federal awards across 469 programs, with 16 major programs reviewed; it resulted in 33 findings, 14 with questioned costs totaling $16.6 million, and qualified opinions for the Summer EBT program, the Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund, and the Child Care Development Fund cluster. Members questioned agency officials in detail about the Summer EBT questioned costs, DHS unresolved findings, broadband grant documentation, cyber security controls, workers’ compensation liabilities, and child care funding and reporting. DHS explained that the Summer EBT issue involved drawing federal funds in advance rather than as benefits were redeemed, and said the process has been corrected. Broadband officials said the questioned $6.6 million reflected documentation-detail disagreements across many invoices rather than missing payments. OST officials described new logging, endpoint detection, and phishing-training efforts, and DFA and Education officials addressed specific audit findings and corrective actions. The committee ultimately moved to hold the two large statewide reports over until the August meeting for further review, with discussion continuing on whether to release some agency staff in the meantime.

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislative Audit issued two reports for the audit of the state's financial statements.
• The Single Audit Act requires that the audit of the state...
• The Single Audit Act requires that the audit of the state be conducted to meet five objectives.
• Okay, so that audit is in process right now. When would that audit be released to us?
• We didn't know if a complete audit would... whenever we requested this, we requested an actual audit,

Summary: The Legislative Joint Auditing Committee met on June 5 and first adopted prior minutes and several committee reports. The executive committee report noted adoption of its minutes, staff updates on scheduled audits, approval of an annual financial audit for the City of Horseshoe Bend, and an update on the intern program. The Counties and Municipalities report covered delinquent private water and sewer audits, compliance follow-up with towns including Denning, Gum Springs, Omer, Fargo, Jericho, and Haynes, and review of current and deferred reports; the committee filed most current reports but deferred several and referred some matters to prosecutors and the Attorney General. The Educational Institutions report said 103 education audits were reviewed, most with no findings, while several school districts had findings and one Booneville School District finding was referred to law enforcement. The State Agencies report included findings at the Department of Finance and Administration and a deferred Department of Health report, and the committee filed 13 reports. The committee then received lengthy presentations on the State of Arkansas annual comprehensive financial report and the state single audit for fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. Legislative Audit issued unmodified opinions on the state financial statements, but identified two material weaknesses: insufficient internal controls at the Office of State Technology to monitor threats and unauthorized access, and improper methodology changes and documentation issues at the Division of Workforce Services affecting year-end estimates for unemployment-related accounts. The single audit covered $12.4 billion in federal awards across 469 programs, with 16 major programs reviewed. Auditors reported 33 findings overall, including 31 federal findings, $12.9 million in outstanding questioned costs, and qualified opinions for the Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer program, the Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund, and the Child Care Development Fund cluster. Committee members questioned DHS, the broadband office, OST, DFA, Education, and Workforce Services about the findings, corrective actions, cyber protections, federal drawdowns, child care reporting, and accounting methodology changes. Several agencies described corrective steps. DHS said it had changed how it draws Summer EBT funds, addressed provider revalidation and incarceration-related Medicaid issues, and updated internal processes and staffing. The broadband office said the questioned costs reflected invoice documentation disputes rather than missing payments and expected Treasury review to resolve the issue. OST said it was expanding logging, endpoint detection, and enterprise monitoring, and described broader cybersecurity investments, training, and a roadmap. DFA and Workforce Services addressed the workers’ compensation and unemployment accounting issues, with Workforce Services saying it had updated its policy and submitted the methodology to DFA. After discussion, the committee voted to hold the two statewide audit reports over until the August meeting, with members asked to submit specific questions in advance so only needed agencies would return. The final item was a special report on the Hot Spring County Solid Waste Authority for January 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025. The audit reviewed compliance with laws, board procedures, bidding, payroll, permits, inspections, and cash handling. It noted prior private audit findings on segregation of duties, that recent private audit reports had not been obtained for 2023 through 2025, and that the current administrator said prior office staff and bookkeeping contractors resigned when he was hired. The authority’s operations and revenue sources were described, and the report was presented for committee review.

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislative Audit issued two reports for the audit of the state's financial statements.
• The Single Audit Act requires that the audit of the state...
• The Single Audit Act requires that the audit of the state be conducted to meet five objectives.
• The audit for your 2020...
• We didn't know if a complete audit would, whenever we requested this, we requested an actual audit.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The Legislative Joint Auditing Committee met on June 5 and first adopted the March 2026 minutes, then approved reports from the executive committee and the standing committees on counties and municipalities, educational institutions, and state agencies. The counties and municipalities report noted progress on delinquent private water and sewer audits, compliance improvements by Denning and Gum Springs, and a 60-day compliance window for Omer and Fargo; several reports were deferred, while others were referred to prosecutors, the Attorney General, or the Government Bonding Board. The educational institutions committee filed 103 audit reports, including findings for several school districts, and one Booneville School District finding was referred to law enforcement. The state agencies committee filed 13 reports and deferred one Department of Health report to August. The committee then reviewed the State of Arkansas annual comprehensive financial report and single audit for fiscal year 2025. Legislative Audit reported clean opinions on the state’s financial statements, but identified two material weaknesses: insufficient internal controls at the Office of State Technology over threat monitoring and unauthorized access, and problems at the Division of Workforce Services with changes to year-end accounting estimates and documentation for unemployment-related receivables and payables. The single audit covered $12.4 billion in federal awards across 469 programs, with 16 major programs reviewed; auditors reported 33 findings, including 31 federal findings, $12.9 million in outstanding questioned costs, and qualified opinions for the Summer EBT program, the Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund, and the Child Care Development Fund cluster. Findings included improper advance draws and reporting issues in Summer EBT, documentation problems in broadband projects, and reporting/reconciliation issues in child care funding. Members questioned agency officials from DHS, the Office of State Technology, the Department of Finance and Administration, the Department of Education, and Workforce Services about the findings and corrective actions. DHS said the Summer EBT issue involved drawing funds in advance and that procedures had been changed for the 2026 cycle; it also explained several repeat findings as timing or provider-enrollment issues. OST officials said they were expanding logging, endpoint detection, and enterprise monitoring, and described cybersecurity as a moving target requiring more investment and training. DFA and Workers’ Compensation officials discussed the workers’ comp fund’s actuarial position and said it should be monitored but did not require immediate action. Education officials said the child care reconciliation problems stemmed from a former employee’s failure to reconcile reports, that staffing and checks had been strengthened, and that the federal funding cut affecting child care was a separate issue. The committee voted to hold the two major state financial reports over until the August meeting, with members asked to submit specific questions in advance, and then received a special report on the Hot Spring County Solid Waste Authority review.

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.