REPORT DIGEST

 

ILLINOIS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

 

FINANCIAL AUDIT AND COMPLIANCE ATTESTATION EXAMINATION

(In accordance with the
Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A-133)

For the Year Ended:

June 30, 2004

 

Summary of Findings:

Total this audit                        10

Total last audit                          3

Repeated from last audit           3

 

Release Date:

July 13, 2005 

 

 

State of Illinois

Office of the Auditor General

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND

AUDITOR GENERAL

 

To obtain a copy of the Report contact:

Office of the Auditor General

Iles Park Plaza

740 E. Ash Street

Springfield, IL 62703

(217) 782-6046 or TTY (888) 261-2887

 

This Report Digest is also available on

the worldwide web at

http://www.state.il.us/auditor

 

 

 

 

 

SYNOPSIS

 

¨      Illinois Housing Development Authority is not adequately monitoring subrecipients of the HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) program.

¨      The Authority inaccurately calculated and reported its match for the HOME program.

¨      Procedures were not fully implemented to periodically reconcile data from individual computer systems to amounts recorded in the general ledger.

¨      The Authority does not effectively utilize the capabilities of the Benedict system to process program loan billings.  In addition, terms of some of the loans tested did not agree with the final loan documents.

¨      The Authority was not maintaining time sheets for its salaried employees in compliance with the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

{Financial Information and Activity Measures are summarized on the next page.}

 


ILLINOIS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

FINANCIAL AUDIT AND COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION

For The Year Ended June 30, 2004

 

GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES

 

FY 2004

 

FY 2003

 

FY 2002

! Total Governmental Funds Revenue........  

    Real Estate Transfer Taxes.............................

      % of Total Revenue.....................................

    Federal Home Funds.......................................

      % of Total Revenue.....................................

    Investment, Interest and Other Income............

      % of Total Revenue....................................

$63,457,723

$43,078,589

67.9%

$16,919,931

26.7%

$3,459,203

5.4%

$57,400,905

$35,677,836

62.1%

$18,467,260

32.2%

$3,255,809

5.7%

$62,868,582

$32,599,376

51.9%

$26,459,592

42.1%

$3,809,614

6.0%

! Total Governmental Funds Expenditures & Transfers.....................................................

    Grants............................................................

      % of Total Expenditures...............................

    General and Administrative.............................

      % of Total Expenditures...............................

    Payments to State of Illinois - GRF..................

      % of Total Expenditures...............................

    Provision for Est. Loss on Loans Receivable…

     % of Total Expenditures..……………………….

    Operating Transfers........................................

     % of Total Expenditures………………………. .

 

$26,387,004

$8,595,276

32.6%

$3,287,728

12.5%

$8,804,000

33.4%

$500,000

1.8%

$5,200,000

19.7%

 

$20,335,942

$10,065,379

49.5%

$3,570,563

17.5%

$0

0.0%

$1,500,000

7.4%

$5,200,000

25.6%

 

$19,152,905

$8,837,951

46.2%

$3,464,954

18.1%

$0

0.0%

$1,500,000

7.8%

$5,350,000

27.9%

PROPRIETARY FUND REVENUE AND EXPENSES (ADMINISTRATIVE)

! Total Administrative Fund Revenue...........

    Service Fees..................................................

      % of Total Revenue.....................................

     Interest and Investment Income......................

      % of Total Revenue.....................................

    Other Income.................................................

      % of Total Revenue.....................................

! Total Administrative Expenses ..................

    Salaries and Benefits......................................

      % of Total Expenses................................. ..

      Average No. of Employees...........................

    Professional Fees ........................................ .

      % of Total Expenses....................................

    Other General and Administrative Expenses.....

      % of Total Expenses....................................

    Transfers.......................................................

      % of Total Expenses....................................

    Financing Costs..............................................

      % of Total Expenses....................................

! Net Value of Property and Equipment........

$17,123,673

$8,964,254

52.4%

$4,055,046

23.7%

$4,104,373

23.9%

$16,690,745

$11,270,791

67.6%

198

$1,921,958

11.6%

$3,426,062

20.6%

$(487,453)

(3.2)%

$559,387

3.4%

$595,811

$16,075,809

$8,211,732

51.1%

$3,602,576

22.4%

$4,261,501

26.5%

$15,888,921

$10,429,594

65.7%

195

$1,277,098

8.0%

$3,604,299

22.7%

$211,646

1.3%

$366,284

2.3%

$703,202

$18,384,006

$8,337,965

45.3%

$5,549,919

30.2%

$4,496,122

24.5%

$14,671,808

$7,525,312

51.2%

190

$1,607,244

11.0%

$4,552,978

31.0%

$1,638

.1%

$984,636

6.7%

$640,264

SELECTED ACTIVITY MEASURES

  Total Number of Bond Issues Outstanding.........

  Total Bond Issue Liability (in millions)................

  Production of Housing Units..............................

  Production of Low Income Housing Units..........

  % Low Income Housing Units to all Units..........

82

$1,490

156,171

140,227

89.8%

94

$1,783

150,055

134,371

89.5%

98

$1,888

144,620

127,198

88.0%

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

   During Audit Period:  Kelly King Dibble

   Currently:  Kelly King Dibble

Note:  Statistics above do not include bond activity.


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Authority is not adequately monitoring subrecipients of the HOME program

 

 

The Authority did not document their review of reports

 


CFDA numbers were not identified to subrecipients

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Authority over-reported matching funds of approximately $45,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


The Authority’s processing systems are not linked to the Authority’s general ledger

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Authority has not implemented procedures to reconcile all its processing information systems to the general ledger

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


No supervisory review is performed on loan information input in the Benedict system

 

 

 

Terms on 10 of 30 loans tested did not agree to information input in the Benedict system

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Not all Authority employees maintained time sheets as required by the Act

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

      The 2004 engagement of the Illinois Housing Development Authority (Authority) is presented in two parts.  The State compliance attestation examination is presented in one report and the financial statement audit is presented in another report.  Our engagement was performed in accordance with the Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A-133.

 

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 

INADEQUATE MONITORING OF SUBRECIPIENTS RECEIVING FEDERAL AWARDS

 

     The Authority is not adequately monitoring subrecipients of the HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME).  We tested 14 subrecipients that comprised 67% of the total HOME subrecipient expenditures for fiscal year 2004.  We noted the following exceptions: 

 

·        The Authority does not document their review of the OMB Circular A-133 reports, and they do not document when the reports have been received.

 

·        The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number and Federal agency name are not identified to the subrecipient.

    

Authority management indicated that the lack of documentation was due to staff shortages and the Authority not having a checklist to monitor HOME sub-recipient reporting.

 

Failure to adequately monitor all subrecipients could result in federal funds being expended for unallowable purposes and/or subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs.  (Finding 1, pages 15-17)  This finding was first reported in 2002.

 

We recommended the Authority document the review of the financial audits performed in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 for each subrecipient that has HOME program expenditures.  Additionally we recommended the Authority document when the OMB Circular A-133 reports have been received to ensure the reports are reviewed in a timely manner. 

 

     Authority management concurred with our recommendations and indicated they will develop a checklist to document the receipt and review of sub-recipient reports.  The Authority also indicated they will include the CFDA number and federal agency name in correspondence with sub-recipients. (For the previous Authority response, see Digest footnote #1.)

 

INACCURATE CALCULATION AND REPORTING OF MATCH EXPENDITURES

 

     During our testing of the match calculations for the HOME program, we selected 12 loans that comprised 50% of the match reported for the HOME program.  We noted 4 of the 12 loan match calculations used loan terms that did not agree to the final loan documents, resulting in an over reporting of match funds of approximately $45,000.  In addition, we noted there was no documentation of a supervisory review of the match calculations prior to their submission.

 

     Authority management stated that the lack of a review of the match calculation was due to staff shortages at the time the calculations were made.

 

     Failure to accurately calculate and report match expenditures could result in the Authority not meeting its match requirement.  (Finding 4, pages 21-22) 

 

     We recommended the Authority implement procedures to ensure match calculations are accurate, and the HOME match report is reviewed by a supervisor prior to submission.

    

     Authority management concurred with our recommendation and indicated they will implement procedures to ensure that match calculations are accurate and there is a supervisory review of the HOME match report prior to its submission.

 

NEED TO IMPLEMENT SYSTEM RECONCILIATION PROCEDURES

 

      The Authority has not implemented periodic reconciliation procedures for data output produced by the Authority’s individual processing systems versus amounts recorded in the general ledger.

 

The Authority completed an implementation of four new computer application systems during fiscal year 2000: the upgraded general ledger system, the single-family program system (AMOS), the investment system (CAMRA), and the multifamily, HOME and affordable trust fund loan programs billing and receivable system (Benedict).  The systems were not integrated in the sense of simultaneously recording a single transaction within each of the individual systems and within the general ledger.

 

Authority management stated these systems do not interface with each other because the operational and reporting features inherent in the individual systems were not available to the Authority in an integrated system at the time of implementation.  This results in the need to create interfaces between the three processing systems and the general ledger either electronically or manually in order to record transactions accurately, completely and consistently.  The Authority has not yet implemented procedures to reconcile all data output produced by their individual operating systems versus amounts recorded in its general ledger.

 

Authority management acknowledged the importance of developing and implementing reconciling procedures.  Various committees were established to oversee and assist in completing the reconciliation project for each individual operating system.  The Authority has made a number of enhancements to the computer applications. 

 

 

Without periodic reconciliation procedures in place to ensure data output produced by the individual systems equate to amounts recorded in the general ledger, the risk exists the Authority’s general ledger may not include the most accurate and complete information. This finding was first reported in 2000.  (Finding 7, pages 26-27)

 

We recommended the Authority proceed with the re-engineering of its financial process.

 

Authority officials concurred with our recommendation and indicated they expect to complete a number of system linkage and reconciliation steps by the end of fiscal year 2005 and should complete the implementation of the recommended process early in fiscal year 2006.  (For the previous Authority response, see Digest footnote #2.)

 

NEED TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL CONTROLS RELATED TO ACCOUNTING FOR PROGRAM LOANS RECEIVABLE

 

       We noted one individual is responsible for entering new loan information into the Benedict system without any supervisory review of the loan terms entered.  In addition, we noted that for ten of the thirty loan payments tested the loan terms in the Benedict system did not agree to the original loan documents.

 

     Authority management stated the staff responsible for monitoring the respective program loans had been updating the balances reported in the system throughout fiscal year 2004.  However, the Benedict system could not be timely updated for Affordable Trust Fund program loans due to an information flow problem.

 

     Without ensuring program loan terms are properly included in the Benedict system, the system cannot be relied upon to update loan balances and properly report financial information.  This finding was first reported in 2001.  (Finding 8, pages 28-29)  

 

     We recommended the Authority establish and implement procedures to reconcile the program loan balances reported per the Benedict system to the general ledger on a monthly basis.  We also recommended the Authority implement procedures to include a supervisory review of new loans entered into the Benedict system to ensure the loan terms agree to the final loan documents.

 

     Authority officials concurred with our recommendations and indicated they plan to perform a reconciliation between the Benedict system and the general ledger starting June 30, 2005 and then monthly going forward.  In addition they indicated they would include a supervisory review of new loans entered into the Benedict system to ensure loan terms agree to final loan documents.  (For the previous Authority response, see Digest footnote #3.)

 

NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES ETHICS ACT

 

     The Authority was not maintaining time sheets for its salaried employees in compliance with the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act (Act).  The Authority does not require time reports from its salaried employees unless overtime hours are incurred. 

 

     The Act requires the Authority to maintain a positive timekeeping process.  The Act notes policies shall require State employees to periodically submit time sheets documenting the time spent each day on official State business.

 

     Authority management stated they did not receive direction from the Governor’s Office until March 24, 2005 and they are in the process of finalizing procedures for new timesheets.  (Finding 10, page 33)

 

     We recommended the Authority amend its policies to require employees to maintain time sheets in compliance with the Act. 

 

     Authority management concurred with our recommendation and indicated they have amended the IHDA Employee Manual and are in the process of finalizing the procedure for the new timesheets, with implementation expected to occur by June 30, 2005.     

 

OTHER FINDINGS

 

     The remaining findings are reportedly being given attention by the Authority.  We will review the Authority’s progress toward the implementation of our recommendations in our next engagement.

 

     Mr. James Kregor, Controller, provided the responses to our recommendations.

 

AUDITORS’ OPINION

 

      Our auditors state the Authority’s financial statements as of and for the year ended June 30, 2004 were fairly presented in all material respects. 

 

 

 

___________________________________

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND, Auditor General

 

WGH:RPU:pp

 

SPECIAL ASSISTANT AUDITORS

 

      KPMG LLP was our special assistant auditor for this engagement.

 

DIGEST FOOTNOTES

 

 #1 - INADEQUATE MONITORING OF SUBRECIPIENTS RECEIVING FEDERAL AWARDS

 

2003:  The Authority concurs with the recommendation to obtain and review the financial audits performed in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 for each subrecipient that has HOME program expenditures.  The Authority will also review and revise, if necessary, its subrecipient monitoring procedures to ensure that subrecipients are notified of OMB Circular A-133 financial audit requirements prior to their receipt of Federal funds and that Authority monitoring activities are properly documented, including follow-up activities in regards to subrecipients that fail to submit reports within the required timeframes.

 

The Authority concurs with the recommendation to add the CFDA number of the HOME Investment Partnership program and the federal agency name to correspondence with the subrecipient.

 

#2 - SYSTEM RECONCILIATION PROCEDURES

 

2003:  The Authority agrees with the recommendation to proceed with the re-engineering of its financial processes and is actively proceeding with this program.  The vendor with whom Authority management contracted to assist the Authority in re-engineering its financial processes has issued its final report.  The Authority has since implemented a number of procedural improvements recommended in the report, including the enhancement of the CAMRA system, which has resolved the system reporting issues.  In addition, the Authority is in the process of installing a single-family system to replace the AMOS system.  This system, the testing of which will begin in May, will have a full linkage with the Authority’s general ledger.  Other financial process re-engineering recommendations, as presented in the external vendor’s report, are also being addressed.

 

#3 - ACCOUNTING FOR PROGRAM LOANS RECEIVABLE

 

2003:  The Authority concurs with the recommendations to create a formal plan that identifies the current limitations inherent in the functionality of the Benedict system and corresponding action steps to address and resolve these limitations and to establish and implement monthly reconciliation procedures.  These issues were addressed in the external vendor’s report on re-engineering processes, and the Authority is considering a number of corrective actions, which will address the above recommendations.

 

The Authority during the audit performed quarterly reconciliations of the Benedict system loan balances to those reported in its financial statements, and has narrowed the difference to less than .5%, as compared to approximately 15% difference as cited in the prior year report.