View source for MC EMS 2020 - Election Management System Database Purged

In your exploration of election-related anomalies, you are here:

* List of [[The Anomalies|Election Anomalies]]
** [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Inspector's report of Arizona Senate of Allegations] 
*** Allegation [[Maricopa Election Management Server (2020)|#3: Maricopa County Election Department - Election Management System]]----[Click for [[Dropbox Collection (2020)|Allegation #2]] or Allegation #4]
**** Sub-allegation '''#1 - Election Management Database Purged''' ---- [Click for [[MC EMS 2020 - Election Files Deleted|Sub-allegation #2]]]
This page seeks to explain potential governance gaps with respect to allegations from the Arizona Senate, specifically for allegation #3 Maricopa County Election Department - Election Management System anomalies. These were investigated by the Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation Report. 

''Governance Gaps'' are reported on and compared to a standard so that you may visualize how poorly managed County services can have an adverse impact without any criminal wrongdoing. We chose the United States Government Accountability Office's (GAO) ''Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government'' (also known as the ''Green Book'') because it represents the ideal standard for governance practices since it is specifically written for government entities, not the business sector. Maricopa County has no obligation or commitments to adhere to any governance-related standards, including the Green Book. Regardless, the Green Book is a representation of what good governance looks like and deviations from that standard are worthy of consideration, not prosecution.
 The Governance Gap Assessment Team are not IT security experts. The technical aspects of the IT configuration are not being disputed. The assessment for governance gaps sought to understand how data and information was being treated with respect to the US GAO's Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government. 

=== [[Maricopa Election Management Server (2020)]] ===
Governance issues identified from [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation] of Arizona Senate allegations of Maricopa County Election Department - Election Management Server (EMS) issues.

==== [[MC EMS 2020 - Election Management System Database Purged]] ====
Governance gaps were identified from Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation of Arizona Senate allegations #3 Maricopa County Election Department - Election Management Server (EMS) issues, which consisted of ten separate allegations. MC EMS 2020 - '''Election Management System Database Purged''' is an assessment of one of the ten sub-allegations associated with the EMS.

===== Allegation =====
The Elections Management System (EMS) database was allegedly purged of all the details associated with the 2020 General Election. The allegation originated from Cyber Ninjas. They explain that all election results were cleared by a Results Talley and Reporting Admin on 2/2/21 at 1714, which was the "evening before" the Pro V & V Audit was scheduled to officially start.

===== Relevant Inspector Notes =====
The AZ AG's inspector reports the following statement from the MC Director of Information Technology, Nate Young, "the server database was required to be clean for the logic and accuracy tests completed by Pro V&V and SLI Compliance on February 1, 2021.

===== Inspector's Finding =====
'''Indeterminate.''' Agents are pending a date to review archived data to ensure all elections files are present.

===== Governance Gap Assessment: =====

* As of the winter of 2021, all of the election files were still not available for inspection by the AZ AG's inspectors, after more than one year had elapsed since the General Election of 2121.
* The report states follow up is needed but does not identify any one person accountable for the follow up. This issue remains unresolved based on the contents.

=== Potential Governance Gap(s): ===

* Principle 1 - Demonstrate Commitment to Integrity and Ethical Values
** Attribute(s): [[1.01]], [[1.02]], [[1.04]], [[1.05]], [[1.08]]
* Principle 2 - Exercise Oversight Responsibility
** Attribute(s): [[2.01]]
* Principle 3 - Establish Structure, Responsibility, and Authority
** Attribute(s): [[3.09]], [[3.10]]
* Principle 4 - Demonstrate Commitment to Competence
** Attribute(s):
* Principle 5 - Enforce Accountability
** Attribute(s):
* Principle 6 - Define Objectives and Risk Tolerances
** Attribute(s):
* Principle 7 - Identify, Analyze, and Respond to Risks
** Attribute(s): [[7.05]], [[7.06]], [[7.09]], [[7.15]]
* Principle 8 - Assess Fraud, Improper Payment, and Information
** Attribute(s): [[8.01]], [[8.02]], [[8.03]], [[8.04]], [[8.05]], [[8.06]], [[8.10]], [[8.14]], [[8.15]]
* Principle 9 - Identify, Analyze, and Respond to Change
** Attribute(s):
* Principle 10 - Design Control Activities
** Attribute(s): [[10.01]], [[10.18]], [[10.19]]
* Principle 11 - Design General Control Activities over Information
** Attribute(s): [[11.02]], [[11.07]], [[11.09]], [[11.10]], [[11.11]]
* Principle 12 - Implement Control Activities
** Attribute(s): [[12.01]], [[12.02]], [[12.03]]
* Principle 13 - Use Quality Information
** Attribute(s):
* Principle 14 - Communicate Internally
** Attribute(s):
* Principle 15 - Communicate Externally
** Attribute(s): [[15.02]], [[15.09]]
* Principle 16 - Perform Monitoring Activities
** Attribute(s): [[16.09]], [[16.10]]
* Principle 17 - Evaluate Issues and Remediate Deficiencies
** Attribute(s): [[17.01]], [[17.02]], [[17.03]], [[17.04]], [[17.05]], [[17.06]], [[17.08]]