1. How will the grant be utilized to combat/reduce present and future DWI violations?
2. What are the total numbers of DWI violations throughout the past 3 years? Years of focus will be 2018, 2019, and 2020 (present).
3. Is there a trend? What methods or efforts had the most impact each year?
4. What is the estimated impact (reduction) in DWI violations, following award of grant?
5. Which methods or efforts will receive increased utilization following award of grant?
6. Are there other solutions that may prove successful if the grant is not approved?
7. Have the following solutions been considered or utilized: Hiring more officers, random DWI checkpoints, increased officer presence in hotspots, harsher penalties or restrictions?
8. Of the previously implemented and currently utilized methods and tactics, which ones have proven to be most unsuccessful? What methods have not been considered or utilized?
Additionally, it is imperative to obtain records which demonstrate how much of the department’s funding is currently being utilized to conduct DWI related operations. Furthermore, how will a grant award improve the department’s ability to conduct increased and more efficient DWI related operations? Will the grant provide sufficient funding for the department’s new/increased DWI operations? Finally, will there be any cost to taxpayers? How much funding will the grant provide? Who is awarding the grant? And what is the probability of a positive return on investment: Long-term cost savings, quality of life, and lives saved? Demonstrating the significance of the last question and placing emphasis on the return on investment variable, Swain and Reed (2010) state the following: Although public budget decision-making may benefit from moral and legal analysis as well, those kinds of analysis extend beyond the scope of this work. Still, the analysis of moral and legal questions is quite appropriate.
What type of audit do you believe is most appropriate in this situation? Justify your choice.