FinePrint

LOGIS

Audit-mill signalsGovernment consortium

13 ALPR audits across 10 agencies. Of the 13 we have read in full, 13 recorded zero findings (100%). Depth: checklist, substantive.

10

Agencies audited

13

Audits filed

100%

Zero findings

0

Real findings

Flags

The pattern here is a template that clears everyone it touches.

  • Never recorded a finding

    All 13 audits read came back with zero findings.

  • Audits its own members

    A member-funded body auditing the agencies that fund it.

Audits by this auditor

No findings recorded

LOGIS ran its standard 7-control checklist against Minn. Stat. § 13.824 (data collection/classification, destruction, sharing, log of use, biennial audit, access authorization, BCA notification). Every control came back 'no exceptions found,' based on screenshots and interviews rather than direct live-system testing. Retention was set to 30 days.

Read the audit (LRL 260984) →
Compliant - no findings

No exceptions found across all seven itemized statute controls. LOGIS reviewed the ALPR policy, agency-provided ALPR system screen prints (including 60-day retention setting), the most recent public log of use, and interviewed staff, plus checked the Legislative Reference Library for past audits.

Read the audit (LRL 251966) →
Compliant - no findings

No exceptions found across all seven itemized statute controls. LOGIS reviewed the ALPR policy, agency-provided screen prints (60-day retention confirmed), the most recent public log of use, and interviewed staff; also checked the Legislative Reference Library for past audits.

Read the audit (LRL 251404) →
Compliant - no findings

No exceptions found across all seven itemized statute controls. LOGIS reviewed the ALPR policy, agency-provided screen prints (60-day retention confirmed), the most recent public log of use, and interviewed staff; also checked the Legislative Reference Library for past audits.

Read the audit (LRL 251387) →
Compliant - no findings

No exceptions found across seven itemized statute controls. LOGIS used a control-by-control testing table (policy review, ALPR system screen prints, staff interviews), a more structured format than the two dominant firms. LOGIS states it has no direct access to the live system and reviews agency-provided screen prints.

Read the audit (LRL 251347) →
Compliant - no findings

No exceptions found across all seven itemized statute controls. LOGIS reviewed the ALPR policy, agency-provided screen prints (60-day retention confirmed), the most recent public log of use, and interviewed staff; also checked the Legislative Reference Library for past audits.

Read the audit (LRL 251700) →
Compliant - no findings

No exceptions found across all seven itemized statute controls. LOGIS reviewed the ALPR policy, agency-provided screen prints (30-day retention confirmed), the most recent public log of use, and interviewed staff; also checked the Legislative Reference Library for past audits.

Read the audit (LRL 251295) →
Compliant - no findings

Zero exceptions. Seven controls tested, "No exceptions found" against each; the conclusion reads "It demonstrates that the security, public accountability and administration of the RPD ALPR program is in compliance with MN Statute §13.824." Evidence cited is policy documentation (RPD Policy 427), staff interviews, and system screenshots showing the 60-day retention setting and the "Reason for Action" requirement. No recommendations, no observations, no mid-audit corrections, no ghost-finding language.

Read the audit (LRL 241731) →
Compliant - no findings

No exceptions found across all seven itemized statute controls. Identical control-by-control testing table format to the Coon Rapids and St. Paul LOGIS audits: policy review, agency-provided screen prints (60-day retention confirmed), and staff interviews.

Read the audit (LRL 240824) →
Compliant - no findings

No exceptions found across all seven itemized statute controls. Standard LOGIS control-by-control testing table: reviewed ALPR Policy 333, agency-provided screen prints from the BOSS and Flock systems (retention shown as 60 days or less), the most recent public logs of use, and staff interviews; also checked the Legislative Reference Library for past audits.

Read the audit (LRL 231472) →
Compliant - no findings

Zero exceptions. Seven control areas tested, "No exceptions found" against each; the report concludes that "the security, public accountability and administration of the RPD ALPR program" is "in compliance with MN Statute §13.824." BOSS ALPR system; 60-day retention evidenced by a system-settings screenshot. No recommendations, no observations, no mid-audit corrections, no ghost-finding language.

Read the audit (LRL 221647) →
Compliant - no findings
Read the audit (LRL 190964) →
Compliant - no findings

Two-page checklist-style audit of Maple Grove PD's legacy Vigilant ALPR deployment — 2 squad-car units, no stationary cameras — finding the department "in compliance with MN Statue [sic] 13.824" across every evaluated area: policy implementation, role-based access controls, 60-day retention, data classification, authorized inter-agency sharing, public reporting without plate numbers, and BCA notification. No findings, exceptions, deficiencies, or recommendations of any kind are recorded, and the narrative contains no language admitting an unrecorded gap. Department staff "demonstrated how they created these reports" from the Vigilant administrative control panel and audit trail rather than the auditor querying the system independently — the same second-hand methodology flagged on the Crystal PD 2019 LOGIS audit — so Tested Live System is left false.

Read the audit (LRL 200647) →

These figures describe what the filed reports contain. They are not an allegation that any audit was improper or that any agency is out of compliance with Minn. Stat. § 13.824. If you believe a record here is wrong, tell us and we will correct it.

← All auditors