REPORT DIGEST
JOINT COMMITTEE ON
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION For the Two Years Ended: June 30, 2006 Summary of Findings: Total this audit 3 Total last audit 2 Repeated from last audit 1 Release Date:
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 and the
Full Report are also available on the worldwide web at http://www.state.il.us/auditor |
SYNOPSIS ¨ JCAR did not fully comply with the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act which requires the evaluation of all agency rules at least once every five years. ¨ JCAR did not maintain sufficient controls over the recording and reporting of its property and equipment.
{Expenditures and Activity Measures are summarized on the reverse page.} |
JOINT
COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
COMPLIANCE
AUDIT
For
The Two Years Ended June 30, 2006
EXPENDITURE STATISTICS |
FY 2006 |
FY 2005 |
FY 2004 |
Total Expenditures (All Funds)................... |
$952,295 |
$1,009,439 |
$944,955 |
OPERATIONS
TOTAL.................................
% of Total Expenditures........................ |
$952,295
100.00% |
$1,009,439
100.00% |
$944,955
100.00% |
Personal Services...................................
% of
Operations Expenditures...........
Average No. of Employees............... |
$727,332
76.38%
18 |
$724,652
71.79%
19 |
$728,474
77.09%
19 |
Other Payroll Costs (FICA,
Retirement)....................................................
% of Operations Expenditures........... |
$138,767
14.57% |
$199,281
19.74% |
$150,961
15.98% |
Contractual Services..............................
% of Operations Expenditures........... |
$34,368
3.61% |
$44,981
4.46% |
$29,874
3.16% |
All Other Operations Items.....................
% of
Operations Expenditures........... |
$51,828
5.44% |
$40,525
4.01% |
$35,646
3.77% |
Cost of
Property and Equipment................. |
$116,960 |
$148,905 |
$148,905 |
SELECTED
ACTIVITY MEASURES*
(Not
Examined) |
2006
(as of
7/1/06) |
2005 |
2004 |
Rules received.........................................................
Rules reviewed........................................................
Recommendations made..........................................
Objections...............................................................
* calendar year basis |
289
131
2
8 |
461
420
24
11 |
399
371
28
13 |
AGENCY DIRECTOR |
During Audit Period: Ms. Vicki Thomas
Currently: Ms. Vicki Thomas |
Evaluation of
agency rules
Insufficient controls over recording and reporting of equipment items |
FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) did not fully comply with the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act (5 ILCS 100 et seq.). The Act requires the evaluation of all rules of each agency at least once every five years. The Act also requires JCAR to perform a systematic and continuing study of existing rules or the existing rulemaking process of agencies and to make periodic investigations of the rulemaking activities of all agencies. We noted that JCAR was not in compliance with these provisions of the Act. We recommended JCAR either develop and implement a formal long range plan which addresses methods to bring its operations into compliance with these statutory requirements or seek appropriate legislative remedy. (Finding 1, pages 8-9) JCAR officials responded they will again consider legislative changes when it devises its legislative recommendations for next year. This finding was first reported in 1988. (For the previous agency response, see Digest Footnote 1.) PROPERTY CONTROL AND REPORTING WEAKNESSES The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) did not maintain sufficient controls over the recording and reporting of its property and equipment. We noted JCAR did not add or remove items from their inventory records in a timely manner, did not add all items received in an accurate manner and did not submit accurate quarterly reports to the State Comptroller. We also noted two items selected for testing had the same tag number. We recommended JCAR ensure all equipment is accurately and timely recorded in JCAR’s property records and properly tagged. In addition, we recommended JCAR thoroughly review all reports prepared from internal records for accuracy before submission to the State Comptroller. (Finding 2, pages 10-11) JCAR officials responded that staff will endeavor to be more timely and accurate in the future.
AUDITORS’
OPINION
We conducted a compliance examination of the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) as required by the Illinois State Auditing Act. We have not audited any financial statements of the JCAR for the purpose of expressing an opinion because the JCAR does not, nor is it required to, prepare financial statements. ____________________________________ WILLIAM G. HOLLAND, Auditor General WGH:JSC:pp ASSIGNED
AUDITORS
The compliance examination was conducted by the Auditor General’s staff. DIGEST
FOOTNOTES #1:
NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT - Previous
Agency Response 2004: JCAR acknowledges that is has not been able
to carry out the statutory requirement that it conduct a five-year review of
all the rules of all State agencies.
During 4 years early in JCAR's history (1980-83), an attempt was made
to conduct these reviews, but that effort had to be abandoned for lack of
adequate staff resources to conduct both on-going review of new regulations
and the 5-year periodic review. To
responsibly fulfill both of these mandates would require at least twice the
staff resources that have been available to JCAR. In view of the present levels of
staffing, JCAR like every other State agency with limited resources, has had
to set priorities. It has chosen to
give more priority to ongoing review of new rules and amendments to existing
rules than to a structured 5-year review for several reasons. First, a review of all existing
rules every 5 years would have the main advantage of removing from the Code
any rules that are no longer necessary, streamlining rules that have been
adopted piecemeal over the years, and updating language to the currently
preferred plain language style.
However, those rules have been in existence for several years without
cataclysmic results. In recognition
of this, JCAR believes it has acted responsibly in giving priority to
reviewing new rules and new regulatory schemes, the reasonableness of which
has not been tested by time. Second, the goals of culling
outdated rules, streamlining rules and improving their readability is served
to a great degree within the on-going review program. Some agencies initiate this type of
cleanup with diligence, and JCAR promotes review of existing text as part of
its review of every amendatory rulemaking.
Third, the initial responsibility
for Code cleanup lies not with JCAR, but with the administrative
agencies. They created the
regulations and they work continually with the affected public in their
implementation of those regulations.
JCAR’s conduct of a five-year review would serve mainly to force an
agency to periodically give priority to initiating a self-review and cleanup
if it has not been able to do so in the course of its normal activities. The absence of formal 5-year review does
not mean that existing rule is not reviewed, because many agencies are
commendably responsible in continually reviewing their own rules. Fourth, JCAR gives strong priority
to its complaint review program as well as its proposed rule review
program. If, after an existing regulation
has been time tested, any member of the public brings a complaint about the
regulation to JCAR, staff will initiate a preliminary review and report the
issue to the JCAR membership. JCAR
can then vote to officially pursue the issue with the agency. In partnership with the affected public,
JCAR has been able to concentrate its limited resources on existing rules
that are problematic, rather than dedicating countless hours to review of
adequate and responsible rules. The auditors recommend that if JCAR cannot conduct 5-year review, it seek an amendment to the Administrative Procedure Act to change the current mandatory requirement for such review. As this finding points out, such legislation has been initiated in the past, but without passage. JCAR will again consider this issue when it devises its legislative recommendations for 2005. |
|
|