Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hiring Recruitment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Howard County advisory board approves minutes and outlines recruiter-led timeline to hire inspector general
Summary
Howard County human resources staff briefed the Inspector General Advisory Board on a recruitment plan that recommends a minimum three-week advertisement window, candidate screening and ranking by HR, a board interview scoring sheet, background checks after a conditional offer and a realistic selection timeline of mid-July.
Chair David Salem opened the April 29 meeting of the Howard County Inspector General Advisory Board by calling the roll and asking for approval of the April 10, 2025 meeting minutes; the motion to approve passed without a recorded roll-call of named votes.
The board then heard a detailed briefing from Anju Bennett, Howard County human resources administrator, and her deputy, Christy Ford, on the hiring process, candidate vetting and a proposed recruitment timeline for the inspector general position. Bennett said the packet provided to board members includes a sample job advertisement, sample interview questions and an organizational chart showing positions that would report to the inspector general.
Bennett recommended advertising the position for a minimum of three weeks and said her team’s preferred approach is a continuous advertisement “until filled,” with HR reviewing candidates as they apply and forwarding only those who meet the county’s minimum qualifications. “So my recommendation actually is to advertise it as a continuous advertisement, like continuous until filled,” Bennett said. She described a three-stage vetting approach: (1) supplemental application questions and required documents at application intake (examples: cover letter, resume, writing sample or redacted audit report); (2) HR screening and qualification summaries that rank packets from strongest to weakest; and (3) advisory board interviews and scoring by board members.
Bennett said HR will provide a scoring sheet for the board and recommended that, after HR’s review at the three-week mark, staff take about one week to assemble and forward qualified candidate summaries to the board. “Christy and her team will review the candidates as they come in. We will be forwarding everything to you by the fourth week,” Bennett said.
On interview logistics, Bennett advised a consistent panel for interviews and offered flexibility: the full board can interview candidates or a smaller subpanel can perform an initial screening and forward finalists to the full board. Several board members favored a tiered approach — a small subset to do first-round interviews, with the full board interviewing the top two or three candidates.
Board Member Curry asked about salary competitiveness. Bennett said HR benchmarked the range against eight large Maryland jurisdictions including Montgomery, Prince George’s and Anne Arundel counties and that an external compensation consultant validated those findings. “Yes, in fact we did quite a bit of research on the salary,” she said, adding that the County Council had also reviewed the research.
Bennett described other administrative steps: a standard conditional offer followed by a criminal background check (typically three to five business days), verification of degrees and licenses and the option for HR to conduct reference checks unless the board prefers to do them. She noted that checking current employers for references is commonly deferred until after a conditional offer to avoid jeopardizing a candidate’s current employment.
For outreach, Bennett said the county posts positions on governmentjobs.com and recommended supplements such as Indeed, LinkedIn and targeted associations (Association of Inspectors General, Government Finance Officers Association). She asked the board to provide any additional targeted outlets it preferred.
On timing, Bennett said the projected schedule — three weeks advertising plus one week for HR review, interviews and background checks — made a mid-July selection realistic if the board moved promptly. “So the conditional offer to the final offer could take as little as a week depending on how long the background check takes,” she said.
Votes at a glance: At the start of the meeting the board voted to approve the April 10, 2025 meeting minutes. Chair David Salem moved to approve the minutes; the motion passed. No individual vote names or counts were recorded in the transcript.
The board tasked member Steve to act as the point of contact (POC) to collect individual, one-on-one emailed feedback from each board member on the job advertisement and job description; staff (Nick and Isaiah) offered to compile that feedback for a public discussion at the next meeting. The board set a tentative next meeting for May 15 to consider a final job advertisement and any other items ready for public discussion.
The briefing left several implementation details to be finalized in the coming weeks: the exact posting language, any supplemental application questions or required sample documents, and whether the board or HR will conduct specific reference checks prior to or after a conditional offer. Bennett and deputy Christy Ford agreed to provide HR’s scoring sheet and to forward ranked candidate packets after the initial posting period.
Board members asked for and received confirmation that licenses and certifications (for example, active CPA or attorney licenses) would be verified and confirmed to be in good standing as part of HR’s vetting.
The recruitment plan presented is staff-led with the advisory board providing final selection authority; HR recommended the board rely on HR’s candidate screening and summaries, then use a consistent interview panel and a board-managed scoring method to select the finalist.
