Washington In-plant Audit Continues to Raise Questions

In his latest blog entry, Ray Chambers delves into the curious way that the State of Washington is handling the audit of its Department of Printing. One big concern is the method used by the State Auditor’s Office to select a “Subject Matter Expert” to conduct the audit.

"Printing performance audits can be a good thing, if done properly. The problem here is the process," Chambers writes. "Only firms that were “prequalified” were allowed to bid on the work. Only one of the 60 or so prequalified firms even mentioned printing, print shops, document management, or any of the terms we would associate with "Subject Matter Expertise" in the documents provided by the Sate Auditor."

Another concern, Chambers points out, is the incredibly rigid time line in which the audit must be completed—much too fast for a proper analysis of a printing operation of this size. Unfortunately, as reported by IPG in the past, politics is playing a role in all this; one very vocal senator has been trying to abolish the in-plant (suggesting its customers use desktop printers instead).

To read more details about this unconventional in-plant audit, check out Ray Chambers' full blog.