Atlanta inspector general outlines office restructure, backlog plan and $1.47 million budget request

Interim Inspector General Blackett told the Atlanta City Council committee that she has reorganized the Office of Inspector General to emphasize "effective and ethical government," established a transparency and communication policy, and requested a FY26 budget of $1,468,960 — an increase of $10,000 from the prior year.

Blackett said the office has changed how investigators are assigned and how the OIG communicates with departments so that timelines, processes and outcomes are clear. "The office of the inspector general must be independent for the purposes of investigation, but independence does not mean isolation," she said, adding that the office has been reaching out to department heads to understand their needs and preferred communication methods.

The reorganization aims to address a backlog of older investigations and improve record retention and case management. Blackett said the office took a concentrated period to work only on backlog cases, placing them on a 90-day investigation cycle; she said staff had completed 25 backlog cases that required her review and formal preparation. She also cited a recently purchased electronic case-management system whose maintenance costs remain in the FY26 request.

Council members pressed Blackett on staffing and the governing board that must sign off on closed investigations under recent charter changes. Blackett said the office had 15 positions filled in February but is currently short five positions after several supervisory resignations, including deputy and assistant inspector general roles. She said an offer has been made for a deputy over compliance and interviews are underway for assistant inspector-general positions and IPRO openings.

The absence of a fully constituted governing board has slowed formal closure and public release of cases, she said. "Based on the charter changes, a case is not closed until it goes to the governing board," Blackett said, noting that she nevertheless shares substantiated and unsubstantiated findings with affected department heads, the chief operating officer and the law department when immediate action is warranted.

Blackett said the OIG will continue discretionary IPRO procurement reviews in addition to mandated reviews of million-dollar-plus procurements and that staff coordinate closely with the Department of Procurement on report timing to avoid delaying procurement actions. She also said she will distribute a worksheet defining "waste, fraud and abuse" to the council to standardize determinations across departments.

Council members voiced concerns about potential delays while the governing board is formed, the risk that investigative findings could be "polished" over time, and the need to protect individuals' reputations when preliminary findings are shared. Blackett acknowledged those concerns and said consistent definitions and procedures will make decisions auditable and more defensible. She also said the office will continue internal briefings to departments and will publish governing-board-approved rulings once the board is in place.

No formal vote or policy adoption took place during the presentation; the exchange was a budget and operational briefing and question-and-answer session.

The presentation included discussion of training needs, requests for new computers and increased record-retention resources, and the OIG's intent to resume discretionary IPRO reviews in the second or third quarter of the fiscal year.