GUEST COLUMN.

In Indiana, law enforcement agencies conduct vehicle identification number (VIN) checks on vehicles purchased out-of-state and vehicles that had been declared a “total loss” after an accident (so-called “salvage titles”). They are required to collect a fee for this service.

But there was a growing concern that certain officers in a small-town police department located in a busy urban area were performing these checks but not properly remitting the required fees. The investigation into this issue evolved into a project that married traditional audit techniques with automation, saving hundreds of hours of manual labor. 

The Manual Challenge

VIN checks are logged in the Indiana Data and Communication System (IDACS), used by all law enforcement agencies in the state. We, in the Indiana State Board of Accounts, were able to export three years’ worth of VIN checks in Excel. The Excel file contained over 60,000 entries after narrowing it down to just the officers about whom there were allegations of improper actions.

One of the complications was that not every VIN check on that list represented a billable interaction. Some inspections were related to officers checking on abandoned vehicles or other no-fee situations. To isolate the relevant transactions, we needed to cross-reference VINs from the IDACS Excel report with the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) system, which stores title and salvage applications as .pdf documents.

Until technology stepped in, we had to manually search the BMV’s system for each VIN associated with the officers in question. If a PDF was found to include one of their badge numbers, we downloaded the file as evidence and recorded the file name in an Excel workpaper.

But thanks to competing priorities, we could only go through 20 VINs per day. Completing the review this way was destined to take years.

Turning to Automation

To solve the scale problem, we developed an automated solution using Power Automate Desktop, a tool included with our Office 365 license.

We built a bot to replicate the manual steps:

• Search applications for a VIN from the Excel list which included situations that merited further investigation.

  
  

• If an application was found, check for a police badge number of interest.

  
  

• If it matched, download the file and log it into an Excel workpaper.

The bot processed 100 to 120 VINs per night, a dramatic improvement. The results were reviewed by an investigator each morning, which was an essential control to ensure quality and apply professional judgment.

Technical Considerations

This project taught us a lot about automation in audit settings. Though the following refer specifically to this effort, they can be applied in a number of circumstances in which audits are performed using artificial intelligence.

• We used an “Attended” bot, which required someone to be logged in. In hindsight, we should have tested the effort in attended mode but transitioned to an “Unattended” license to reduce the need for monitoring overnight.

  
  

• Running the bot from remote locations increased the risk of timeouts and disconnections. It performed best when executed directly from the state government center.

  
  

• Data quality is key. The bot required structured data. If the VINs or badge numbers were embedded in unpredictable formats, it couldn’t reliably extract them.

  
  

• Human review is essential. The bot handled repetitive searching, but interpreting documents and making audit determinations still relied on auditor judgment.

Looking Ahead

This project demonstrated how low-cost tools can significantly improve audit efficiency. Power Automate Desktop was included in our existing Office 365 license, meaning there was no additional software cost. The true investment was time and training, but the payoff was substantial.

While automation won’t eliminate the need for skilled auditors, it augments what we can do. It frees our team from repetitive tasks and allows us to focus on the critical thinking that drives audit quality.

As we continue to adapt these tools, we recognize the need for thoughtful implementation:

• Systems must be stable and accessible.

  
  

• Controls must be in place to ensure bots work as intended.

  
  

• Results must always be reviewed by skilled auditors or investigators.

Conclusion

This investigation helped us scale our work, reduce errors, and deliver timely results without increasing staff.  The audit team was able to focus on analysis and decision making.

Our success with using robotic process automation proved that technology can be a force multiplier. In public service, where we must be accountable for the efficient use of resources deployed, technology is not a luxury, it is imperative. When used with thoughtful planning and appropriate oversight, it can empower auditors to do more and ultimately, better serve the public interest.

AUTHOR’S NOTE: Special thanks to Terry Johnson, Applications Systems Analyst and coauthor, for developing and launching the robotic process automation without which we would not have had the opportunity to study the use of this technology in an audit setting.  I would also like to thank Matt Jacobson, IT Manager, for his support and guidance during this project and Paul Joyce, State Examiner, for his constant push for more innovation in our work. 

The contents of this Guest Column are those of the author, and not necessarily Barrett and Greene, Inc. 

#StateandLocalGovernmentManagement #StateandLocalGovernmentPerformance #StateandLocalTechnologyManagement #StateAuditAutomation #IndianaAuditAutomation  #IndianaStateBoardOfAccounts #StateandLocalGovernmentAudit #StateandLocalInnovation #StateandLocalPerformanceAudit #StateandLocalPerformanceManagement  #StateandLocalGovernmentData #StateandLocalDataQuality #StateandLocalAuditTool #StateRoboticProcessAutomation #StateHumanBotOversight #ImprovingAuditEfficiency #PowerAutomateDesktop #StateAuditProductivity #TammyWhite #IndianaAuditEfficiency #IndianaAuditProductivity #IndianaDataCommunicationSystem #BandGGuestColumn #BarrettandGreeneInc