Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Audits And Investigations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County auditor outlines audits, new anonymous fraud hotline to boost oversight
Summary
The Office of the County Auditor briefed the Anne Arundel County Council on its audit and investigations work, the audit process and a new third‑party anonymous ethics hotline to intake fraud, waste and abuse complaints and support investigations.
The Anne Arundel County Office of the County Auditor presented an overview of its mission, audit practices and a new anonymous complaint intake system to the County Council on Monday.
“My name is Louis Duncan. I am the executive manager for the office of the county auditor executing the duties of the county auditor,” Duncan said as he opened the briefing and described the office’s role supporting the council and county residents through independent, objective audits.
The audit director, Brenda Cachuela, walked council members through the office organizational chart and the four audit types the office conducts: performance, financial (contracted per charter), information‑technology and special community benefit district desk reviews. She described the audit cycle — preliminary findings, exit conferences with agencies, management response, internal quality assurance and posting final reports online — as the office’s path to improving program management and internal controls.
Andrew Powell, the investigations director, said the unit was stood up in February 2025 and has implemented formal local definitions for fraud, waste and abuse to guide intake and investigations. To make reporting easier and protect anonymity, Powell announced a partnership with a third‑party vendor, the Mistratech Ethics Hotline, which accepts complaints via a 24‑hour phone line, web form and QR code in English and Spanish.
Powell described the unit’s five‑step investigative workflow: intake and assessment, planning and evidence collection (including interviews and subpoenas when appropriate), analysis and verification, reporting findings and recommendations to appropriate partners (including law enforcement or the State’s Attorney when needed), and prevention and education to strengthen controls and awareness.
Council members asked how to refer matters to the auditor. Duncan advised email for routine referrals and phone calls if a referral contains personally identifiable or confidential information. The auditors agreed to prepare a concise, public‑facing two‑page briefer and to include closed‑case summaries and hotline information on the office website.
The briefing prompted council requests for expanded analytic capacity: several members asked whether economic (prospective) analyses could be added to the office’s primarily retrospective audit work; Duncan said the office would assess needs and consider building that skill set.
The council did not take formal action but thanked the auditors and asked for follow‑up materials for public distribution and for council referral procedures.
