Key Facts

Each entry identifies the responsible institution, period reviewed, exact finding, financial classification, management response and corrective-action status.



The classifications matter:



&#8211; Confirmed waste: Spending an auditor identifies as unnecessary, inefficient or serving little public purpose.



&#8211; Improper payment: A payment made incorrectly or contrary to applicable requirements.



&#8211; Questioned cost: Spending requiring additional documentation or review.



&#8211; Control weakness: A missing safeguard that increases the risk of fraud, waste or error.



&#8211; Statutory noncompliance: Failure to perform a duty required by law.



&#8211; Operational delay: A backlog or slow process that consumes resources or increases public risk.



&#8211; Alleged fraud: Suspected intentional misconduct still under investigation.



&#8211; Adjudicated fraud: Intentional misconduct established through a guilty plea or court judgment.



An audit finding keeps the classification used in the report. An incorrect travel reimbursement is an improper payment. A complaint backlog is an operational failure. A missing conflict disclosure is a compliance finding. A criminal fraud label requires separate evidence establishing intent.



For additional definitions, read the <a href="https://www.tpaction.com/government-fraud-waste-and-corruption-the-plain-english-glossary/"> Government Fraud, Waste and Corruption Plain-English Glossary</a>.

How this Arizona government waste tracker works

Report date: April 21, 2026 Period reviewed: Fiscal years 2023 and 2024 Institution: Multiple Arizona state boards and the central agency processing certain travel claims Classification: Improper payments, reimbursement noncompliance and incomplete corrective action



The Arizona Auditor General reviewed per diem compensation and expense reimbursements paid to members of state boards, commissions, councils and advisory committees.



The audit found that the state’s central processing agency made incorrect travel payments for three agencies and adjusted another agency’s travel claim without notifying it. Two additional agencies failed to consistently reimburse board members according to state or agency policies.



The report establishes payment and oversight failures. Determining the full financial effect requires the transaction-level schedules showing each incorrect payment, reimbursement, adjustment and recovery. Status: audit finding.



Corrective status: Partially completed. Nine of 13 reviewed recommendations were implemented, while four remained incomplete or in progress. Partially completed. Nine of 13 reviewed recommendations were implemented, while four remained incomplete or in progress.



Read the <a href="https://www.azauditor.gov/state-board-member-diem-compensation-and-expense-reimbursements-fiscal-year-2023-and-2024-annual"> State Board Member Per Diem Compensation and Expense Reimbursements review</a>.

State-board per diem and travel payments

Report date: September 4, 2026 Institution: Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings Classification: Conflict-of-interest noncompliance and control weakness



The Office of Administrative Hearings provides independent hearings involving Arizona state agencies. Its decisions can affect professional licenses, government benefits, regulatory enforcement and other disputes between residents, businesses and public institutions.



The Auditor General found that the office generally met required hearing time frames but failed to comply with some state conflict-of-interest requirements. Those requirements identify financial or personal interests that could influence, or appear to influence, official duties.



A conflict-of-interest finding establishes that required safeguards were incomplete or missing. That creates a risk involving fairness, public trust and the possible cost of reconsidering decisions affected by undisclosed interests. Status: audit finding.



Corrective status: Open. The audit was issued September 4, 2026, and future follow-up reporting must establish whether the office implemented the recommendations.



The official report is available through the <a href="https://www.azauditor.gov/reports/list-type/performance-audits/state-agency"> Arizona Auditor General’s state-agency report library</a>.

Office of Administrative Hearings conflict-of-interest controls

Report date: August 31, 2026 Periods reviewed: Including fiscal years 2023 and 2024 Institution: Arizona Medical Board Classification: Operational delay, statutory noncompliance, unauthorized disciplinary action and waste risk



The Arizona Medical Board licenses and regulates physicians. The 2026 sunset review found that the board issued licenses on time but failed to resolve complaints promptly.



Auditors reported that some complaint investigations took longer than 180 days and that the backlog of unresolved complaints had grown. The board also lacked sufficient oversight and accountability mechanisms and did not consistently act within, or fully use, its statutory authority.



The Auditor General said these failures increased public-safety risks and contributed to inefficient operations, statutory noncompliance, unauthorized disciplinary actions and waste of public resources.



A complaint backlog can create taxpayer costs through repeated staff work, delayed enforcement, unnecessary legal proceedings and inefficient case management. The audit summary classified the financial effect as waste risk and inefficient operations. Status: audit finding.



Calculating the cost would require:



The number and age of open complaints



Staff hours spent on delayed cases



Legal expenses associated with unauthorized actions



Cases requiring repeated investigation



Costs caused by incomplete or inaccurate records



Outcomes of complaints exceeding statutory time frames



Management response: The board submitted a formal response to the audit. Its commitments should be measured against later implementation records.



Corrective status: Open pending follow-up.



Read the <a href="https://www.azauditor.gov/arizona-medical-board-sunset-review"> Arizona Medical Board Sunset Review</a>.

Arizona Medical Board complaint backlog

Report date: June 19, 2026 Institution: Arizona Department of Education and Arizona State Board of Education Classification: Statutory noncompliance, weak public reporting and inefficient use of accountability resources



Arizona uses an A-F system to communicate school performance. The Department of Education developed the system, and the State Board of Education approved it.



The Auditor General found that the system obscured important performance differences among schools. It also omitted statutorily required information about the indicators used to calculate overall grades, limiting the system’s usefulness to parents, lawmakers and the public.



The audit additionally found that Arizona awarded A and B grades to a higher proportion of schools than the comparison states reviewed. That finding raises questions about whether the system communicates performance differences clearly and satisfies Arizona law. Status: audit finding.



Taxpayer resources support data collection, formula development, administration, public reporting and school-improvement decisions. When the resulting system omits required information or obscures meaningful differences, the state receives less accountability value from that spending.



The audit classified the financial effect as ineffective or inefficient use of public resources. Status: audit finding.



Management response: The Department and State Board supplied separate responses. The Auditor General also published comments concerning the State Board’s response.



Corrective status: Open. Future records must show whether required indicators were added and whether the grading formula became more transparent.



Read the <a href="https://www.azauditor.gov/arizona-department-education-states-f-letter-grade-system"> Arizona Department of Education A–F Letter Grade System audit</a>.

Arizona’s A-F school letter-grade system

A living tracker should expand when official reports contain clearly classified findings and corrective-action information. Other 2026 records already warrant continued monitoring.



A July 2026 audit reported that a school district improperly spent more than $164,000 on employee fringe benefits, food and beverages without ensuring compliance with state requirements. That amount is identified spending, and the final allowable, recoverable or wasted portion follows the audit’s exact classification. Status: audit finding.



Several Arizona cities and towns also failed to submit required audited financial statements or expenditure limitation reports on time. Missing reports prevent auditors and residents from confirming whether public money was properly recorded and spent. Status: audit finding.



The Auditor General also reported that state agencies had not fully implemented cost-control requirements for a long-term-care program. Missing deadlines for assessment tools and service limits can increase program costs, but the amount attributable to each delayed control requires additional analysis.



These records can be tracked through <a href="https://www.tpaction.com/what-did-arizonas-2025-26-auditor-general-reports-find-and-who-has-to-fix-it/"> What did Arizona’s 2025–26 Auditor General reports find, and who has to fix it?</a>.

Other 2026 findings to monitor

Before describing an audit amount as taxpayer waste, verify:



&#8211; The institution and period reviewed.



&#8211; Whether the amount was paid, estimated, questioned or recovered.



&#8211; Whether auditors called it waste, an improper payment or a control risk.



&#8211; Whether management agreed with the finding.



&#8211; Whether documentation later resolved the issue.



&#8211; Whether repayment was ordered.



&#8211; Whether the money was actually recovered.



&#8211; Whether a follow-up audit confirmed corrective action.



Arizona OpenBooks can help residents identify recorded agencies, vendors and transactions. A payment entry shows that a transaction was recorded, and the contract, invoice and audit report show whether the price was reasonable and the service delivered.



Search transactions through <a href="https://openbooks.az.gov/"> Arizona OpenBooks</a> and compare them with the corresponding contracts, invoices and audit reports.

How to determine whether an audit finding is waste

Each audited institution responded through the Auditor General’s formal response process. On the per diem review, agencies had implemented 9 of 13 recommendations by the April 21, 2026 follow-up, with 4 incomplete or in progress. The Arizona Medical Board submitted a formal response to its August 31, 2026 sunset review, and its commitments will be measured against later implementation records. The Arizona Department of Education and the State Board of Education each submitted separate responses to the June 19, 2026 letter-grade audit, and the Auditor General published additional comments concerning the State Board’s response. The Office of Administrative Hearings audit was issued September 4, 2026, and its follow-up reporting has not yet been published.

The institutions’ responses

Arizona’s Democratic-led executive institutions in 2026 received audit findings involving improper travel reimbursements, incomplete conflict-of-interest safeguards, delayed professional complaints and a public school accountability system that omitted statutorily required information.



The records also show different corrective statuses. Some prior per diem recommendations were completed, others remained in progress or unimplemented, and newer Medical Board, Administrative Hearings and education findings awaited follow-up.



This page tracks Arizona audit findings affecting Democratic-led state institutions and other public entities.



The audit record supplies documented evidence of oversight weaknesses and inefficient administration across these institutions. Status: audit finding.



Read the broader evidence review at <a href="https://www.tpaction.com/are-democrats-corrupt-what-the-public-record-shows-state-by-state/"> Are Democrats corrupt? What the public record shows, state by state</a>.

What this shows about Democratic governance.

Last reviewed: September 11, 2026.&nbsp;



This tracker will monitor:



Correction or recovery of improper travel payments



Completion of outstanding per diem recommendations



Conflict-of-interest reforms at the Office of Administrative Hearings



Reduction of the Medical Board complaint backlog



Review of potentially unauthorized disciplinary actions



Changes to the A–F school accountability system



Publication of required financial reports



New Auditor General findings and follow-ups

What remains open?

Frequently Asked Questions

Arizona’s 2026 audits document improper payments, incomplete corrective actions, conflict-of-interest noncompliance, complaint delays and ineffective public reporting. These findings show where taxpayer resources are being lost, exposed to risk or used without producing the accountability required by law.



The strongest conclusions remain finding-specific. Each amount keeps the auditor’s classification: confirmed payment, estimated exposure, questioned cost or control weakness. Continued follow-up will show whether Arizona institutions complete the recommendations.

The bottom Line

Arizona residents can strengthen accountability by reading audit findings, examining public transactions and tracking whether agencies complete corrective actions. They can also confirm their eligibility and <a href="https://tpaction.com/Vote"> Register to Vote</a>, compare official findings with management responses and <a href="https://www.tpaction.com/plan"> make a plan to vote</a> based on documented evidence about public spending and oversight.



Residents who want to promote government transparency can monitor new reports, request public records and share verified audit findings with their communities. They can also get involved in voter education by explaining what each audit classification means. <a href="https://www.tpaction.com/getinvolved"> get involved</a> in voter education by helping other Arizonans distinguish confirmed waste, improper payments, questioned costs, control weaknesses, unresolved allegations and adjudicated criminal misconduct.

Review the record and participate

Track Arizona audits documenting waste, improper payments, complaint backlogs, conflicts of interest and failures to protect public resources.

Where are Arizona taxpayer dollars being wasted? A running tracker of audit findings

Key Facts

How this Arizona government waste tracker works

State-board per diem and travel payments

Office of Administrative Hearings conflict-of-interest controls

Arizona Medical Board complaint backlog

Arizona’s A-F school letter-grade system

Other 2026 findings to monitor

How to determine whether an audit finding is waste

The institutions’ responses

What this shows about Democratic governance.

What remains open?

Frequently Asked Questions

Is this an example of Democratic corruption?

Does every audit finding represent fraud?

How much money did these four findings cost?

Who must fix the problems?

The bottom Line

Review the record and participate

RioSlum Studio

Where are Arizona taxpayer dollars being wasted? A running tracker of audit findings

Key Facts

How this Arizona government waste tracker works

State-board per diem and travel payments

Office of Administrative Hearings conflict-of-interest controls

Arizona Medical Board complaint backlog

Arizona’s A-F school letter-grade system

Other 2026 findings to monitor

How to determine whether an audit finding is waste

The institutions’ responses

What this shows about Democratic governance.

What remains open?

Frequently Asked Questions

Is this an example of Democratic corruption?

Does every audit finding represent fraud?

How much money did these four findings cost?

Who must fix the problems?

The bottom Line

Review the record and participate