Legislative Service Office officials told the Management Audit Committee that the Legislature’s program‑evaluation function has been largely dormant and the office lacks staff to perform the type of in‑depth program reviews the committee has historically commissioned.

"Essentially, since I became director in 2016, I poached positions from the management evaluation or a program evaluation section, to be able to hire personnel in other growth areas at LSO," the LSO director told the committee, explaining staffing decisions over the last decade. The director said the last full program evaluation by LSO was completed in 2018 and that, since then, the office has not undertaken a full program evaluation.

Matt Petrie, administrator of LSO’s Research and Evaluation Division, told the committee the Management Audit Committee previously considered two legislative options in 2023: to authorize seven new LSO positions (estimated at roughly $1 million a year) to restore program evaluation capacity, or to suspend program evaluation activities for five years and sunset the function. Neither bill advanced, and LSO staff said they currently do not retain full program‑evaluation staff.

The committee discussed whether to rely on external consultants for ad‑hoc evaluations or to rebuild an in‑house capability. LSO staff recommended consultants for single, discrete evaluations but said a permanent, staffed program would be preferable if the Legislature wants recurring, in‑depth reviews.

The committee also heard from Justin Chavez, director of the Department of Audit, on financial audits. Chavez said the statewide financial statement audit is procured through an RFP every four years and then performed annually by the selected independent CPA firm. Component units and many agencies separately procure independent CPA audits; in addition, the Department of Audit produces audit reports and said it could provide the committee with a consolidated list or summary of audits it receives each year (roughly 300 audits), noting that availability and the number of qualified firms in‑state is limited.

LSO staff and committee members noted practical constraints: the Legislature itself does not conduct routine financial audits; to secure a financial audit of a state agency the committee would need statutory authority and money to hire an outside accounting firm, or LSO would need to build an internal financial‑audit capability. The LSO director told members the committee can request such audits, but "you would need money to be able to do that" and the committee cannot appropriate funds itself.

Committee next steps included requests to LSO and the Department of Audit: Department of Audit will provide a summary of audits it holds or receives (including independent CPA audits of component units), and LSO will circulate departmental program‑priority tables taken from agency budget materials so committee members can identify statutory authorities or programs that appear inactive or unfunded. Committee members said they will review those materials and return to the question of whether to pursue restored in‑house evaluations or engage consultants.