Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Shelter Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DeKalb audit flags seven high-risk issues at Lifeline shelter; county to run its own risk review
Summary
An Office of Independent Audit summary of a consultant review found seven high‑risk observations at Lifeline-operated shelter — from staffing and inventory gaps to facility drainage and sanitation — and recommended a risk assessment and possible deeper audit. Management disputes some findings; no evidence of misappropriation was presented.
An audit summary presented to the DeKalb County IRPS committee on an outside consultant’s review of Lifeline-operated animal shelter operations identified seven high-risk observations and prompted county officials to open a formal follow-up.
The Office of Independent Audit (OIA) told commissioners it would perform a records-based risk assessment and verify discrepancies between the consultant’s snapshot observations and Lifeline’s management assertions. "As overall, based on our analysis, there are about 7 high risk observations or findings," the presenter said during the briefing.
Why it matters: Commissioners and residents have raised repeated concerns about care and cleanliness at the county’s contracted shelter. The OIA review focuses on potential risks to animal welfare, staff safety, legal compliance and financial integrity, and it could lead to further audit work or budget requests to fund repairs.
Key findings and disagreements
The consultant reported capacity-to-care shortfalls and said daily animal inventory was not being performed during the consultant’s on-site observation. OIA said the consultant relied on Lifeline’s own SOPs (which call for twice-daily feeding and cleaning) to assess performance, while management maintained the operation meets the National Animal Care & Control Association minimum cited in the report.
Commissioners pressed OIA on verification steps. OIA said it would examine documentation across multiple days and not rely solely on the consultant’s four-day snapshot. "We would carefully examine the process ... request the documentation in addition to observations on whichever day we make a site visit," OIA said.
Facility and operations issues
The consultant noted multiple facility problems (cramped spaces, double-stacked cages, poor lighting, water pooling that may require re-sloping floors, and HVAC and sanitation problems). Management has agreed to some corrective steps, including bringing cleaning under Lifeline’s direct management and retraining staff. Timelines provided to the committee anticipate certain structural and interior improvements by January–February 2026.
On funding, a commissioner asked whether SPLOST or the CIP has money set aside for the resloping; a county official said additional allocation would be required and would need to be brought forward for approval.
Forensic audit recommendation and next steps
The consultant recommended a forensic audit because Lifeline operates parallel programs in neighboring jurisdictions and transfers animals among facilities. Management disputed the need, saying the vendor is paid on a fee-for-service basis and does not hold county funds. OIA said the recommendation is based on a raised risk profile rather than a specific "smoking gun." "There was no specific document or, you know, smoking gun that was identified by the consultant," OIA said.
OIA will conduct an initial risk assessment (financial statements, contract and transport records, invoice sampling) and then recommend whether a deeper forensic audit is necessary. Commissioners asked about lower-cost alternatives (for example additional financial oversight); OIA said it would consider those as part of its assessment.
Cost-per-animal metric
The consultant reported a cost per animal of $786.54, about 31% above the national average cited in the report. OIA said it would analyze underlying invoices and the consultant’s methodology to determine whether higher costs reflect operational choices (such as no-kill practices) or indicate inefficiency.
No evidence of misappropriation found in the report
Commissioners asked whether the consultant had uncovered evidence of misappropriation or misuse of funds. OIA said the consultant did not present documentation proving misappropriation; the recommendation for further review stems from the operational and contractual environment rather than documented theft.
What happens next
The committee asked OIA to complete follow-up work and return with findings and, if necessary, recommendations for audit scope or policy changes. Committee members urged prompt action: one commissioner said the report was completed in late 2024 and asked that recommended actions not be delayed. The presenter agreed to continue verification and to schedule a return presentation when follow-up materials are available.
The committee adjourned after approving other agenda business; commissioners asked staff to bring remaining contract items and any funding requests back to committee.
