REPORT DIGEST

 

ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING AND STANDARDS BOARD

 

COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION

For the Two Years Ended:

June 30, 2008

 

Summary of Findings:

Total this audit                      13

Total last audit                        7

Repeated from last audit         3

 

 

Release Date:

February 26, 2009

 

 

 

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 Full Report are also available on

the worldwide web at

http://www.auditor.illinois.gov

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SYNOPSIS

 

¨      The Board did not exercise adequate controls over its electronic data processing consulting contracts.

 

¨      The Board did not maintain an adequate segregation of duties.

 

¨      The Board did not maintain adequate controls over its disbursements to Mobile Team Units.

 

¨      The Board did not maintain adequate controls over its contractual employees and its field staff.

 

¨      The Board did not exercise adequate controls over employee attendance to ensure employee work hours and benefit time were properly recorded and documented.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expenditures and Activity Measures are summarized on the reverse page.}

 


 

 

 

 

            ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING AND STANDARDS BOARD

                                                  COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION

                                             For the Two Years Ended June 30, 2008

 

EXPENDITURE STATISTICS

FY 2008

FY 2007

FY 2006

     Total Expenditures (All Funds) (1).......

 

$13,982,160

$14,086,084

$13,842,520

     OPERATIONS TOTAL...........................

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

$2,497,992

17.87%

$2,398,734

17.03%

$2,398,168

17.32%

         Personal Services............................

           % of Operations Expenditures......

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

$1,088,602

43.58%

20

$1,101,167

45.91%

21

$1,081,485

45.10%

23

         Other Payroll Costs (FICA, Retirement).....................................

           % of Operations Expenditures......

 

$523,899

20.97%

 

$466,626

19.45%

 

$460,557

19.20%

         Contractual Services........................

           % of Operations Expenditures......

$283,930

11.37%

$219,247

9.14%

$300,404

12.53%

         All Other Operations Items.......................

           % of Operations Expenditures.................

 

$601,561

24.08%

$611,694

25.50%

$555,722

23.17%

     GRANTS TOTAL...................................

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

 

$11,484,168

82.13%

$11,687,350

82.97%

$11,444,352

82.68%

     Cost of Property and Equipment...........

$661,429

$677,825

$619,923

 

 

 

 

 

SELECTED ACTIVITY MEASURES

(not examined)

FY 2008

FY 2007

FY 2006

·         Law Enforcement Officers completing mandated basic training……………………...

 

1,337

 

1,485

 

1,644

·         County Corrections Officers completing mandated basic training……………………...

 

506

 

665

 

766

·         Public Safety Personnel trained utilizing

in-service training delivery system…………...

 

43,202

 

 

42,190

 

42,442

 

 

AGENCY DIRECTOR(S)

     During Examination Period:  Thomas J. Jurkanin, Ph.D.

     Currently:  Thomas J. Jurkanin, Ph.D.

(1) Includes appropriated and non-appropriated fund expenditures.  In FY08, expenditures totaled $13,685,676 and $296,484 respectively.  In FY07, expenditures totaled $13,575,245 and $510,839 respectively. In FY06, expenditures totaled $13,152,318 and $690,202, respectively.

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

Inadequate controls over consulting agreements

 

 

 

Professional and consulting services not competitively procured

 

 

 

 

 


Contract not filed with the Comptroller’s Office

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Lack of segregation of duties in vouchering and property control areas

 


Authority to approve, tag and maintain property records and perform physical inventory

 

Authority to procure, prepare and approve vouchers and maintain records

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Inadequate controls

 

 

 


$54,000 voucher lacked supporting documentation

 


$7,803 for food and room charges at a horse racing event

 

 

 

 

 

 

Board partially accepts

 

 

 


Auditors’ comment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Inadequate controls

 

 

No documentation for $23,208 paid to two contractual employees

 

 

 

 

Activity reports submitted by field staff not filed weekly and lacked detailed information

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Inadequate controls

 

 

 

 

 

 


Employees worked less than the scheduled work day

 

 

 

 

 


Accrued absence balances overstated

 

 

 

 


Leave slips submitted after leave was taken

 

 

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING CONTRACTS

 

The Board did not did not exercise adequate controls over its electronic data processing (EDP) consulting agreements.

 

·         The Board did not competitively procure the professional consulting services utilized for the design and maintenance of its website.  The Board contracted with a vendor for an amount not to exceed $19,200 in FY07 to complete the project; however, payments to this vendor totaled $34,605 in FY07 including $8,800 in payments not processed under the contract.  In addition, the Board did not procure these services through the Department of Central Management Services (DCMS) as required.   

 

·        The Board paid $12,203 in FY07 to a vendor for professional website application services and did not execute and file a contract with the State Comptroller’s Office until it had already processed $5,288 in payments. (Finding 1, pages 10-11)

  

We recommended the Board ensure professional and artistic contracts exceeding $20,000 are competitively procured and all amounts are paid under the contract in accordance with the contract terms.  Further, we recommended the Board procure EDP consulting services exceeding $25,000 through DCMS as required by the Code. We also recommended the Board ensure professional and artistic services contracts exceeding $5,000 are reduced to writing and filed with the State Comptroller’s Office.  

 

Board officials accepted the recommendation.

 

LACK OF SEGREGATION OF DUTIES

 

The Board did not maintain an adequate segregation of duties in the vouchering and property control areas. 

 

We noted the following:

 

·        One person had authority to approve property purchases, tag inventory, maintain the property records, perform the annual physical inventory and complete the quarterly reports of State property.

·        One person had authority to perform procurement functions, prepare and approve vouchers, sign as receiving officer, maintain accounting records and perform monthly expenditure reconciliations.  (Finding 2, page 12)

 

We recommended the Board allocate sufficient personnel in order to maintain effective internal control over the authorization, custody and record keeping duties associated with vouchering and property control.

 

Board officials accepted the recommendation.

 

INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER DISBURSEMENTS TO MOBILE TEAM UNITS

 

The Board did not maintain adequate controls over its disbursements to Mobile Team Units (MTUs).   We noted the following:

 

·      One of 14 (7%) vouchers tested totaling $54,000 to an MTU for FY07 death investigation training lacked any supporting documentation.

 

·     The Board paid a voucher in FY07 for major case squad training that included $7,803 for food and room charges for the 346 attendees to attend a reception at a horse racing event in the evening after the training.  (Finding 3, pages 13-14)

 

We recommended the Board require and maintain sufficient documentation to substantiate payments for training to MTUs and ensure all reimbursements for training are proper.

 

      Board officials partially accepted the recommendation and noted the funding for the death investigation training was paid in advance similar to disbursements made under Public Act 82-674.  

 

In an auditors’ comment, we noted the Board never provided us with documentation of the $54,000 voucher, and the Board is required to maintain documentation to substantiate its expenditures, regardless of whether the funding was provided in advance.

 

INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER CONTRACTUAL EMPLOYEES AND FIELD STAFF  

 

The Board did not maintain adequate controls over its contractual employees and its field staff.   We noted the following:

 

·      The Board paid $23,208 to two contractual employees during FY07 to provide representative services for the Board before the Illinois General Assembly and other related public bodies and organizations, as necessary.  We noted the employees did not submit properly completed weekly status reports required by Board policy detailing hours worked and documentation of the activities performed on behalf of the Board.

 

·       Two of 6 (33%) activity reports tested submitted by a field staff employee were submitted monthly instead of weekly as required by Board policy.  In addition, those monthly reports did not include detailed information regarding the duties performed for each workday.  (Finding 4, pages 15-16)

 

We recommended the Board require and maintain sufficient documentation to ensure services contracted for have been provided and that the expenditures are  reasonable and necessary.  In addition, we recommended the Board take appropriate action to ensure field staff duties are adequately documented in all weekly reports.

 

Board officials accepted the recommendation.

 

INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER EMPLOYEE ATTENDANCE

 

The Board did not exercise adequate controls over employee attendance to ensure employee work hours and benefit time were properly recorded and documented. 

 

 We tested six months of attendance records for nine employees and noted the following: 

 

·      Seven of 9 (78%) employees tested worked less than their scheduled work days according to the Board’s sign in sheets due to arriving late and taking extended breaks and lunch hours.  As a result, the Board failed to record 26 hours of benefit time resulting in overstated employee accrued compensated absence balances.

 

·       Six of 9 (67%) employees did not submit leave slips timely or in advance when possible.   The employees submitted vacation, sick, and personal time leave slips for approval from 6 to 29 days after the leave time was taken.  The majority of leave slips were completed only after the employees received a request from the timekeeper.  (Finding 5, pages 17-18)

 

We recommended the Board implement the necessary controls in order to maintain accurate daily attendance records in compliance with the Code.  Specifically, the Board should ensure that employee attendance records are correct, complete, and reconcile with leave requests.   In addition, the Board should require leave requests to be submitted in advance or as timely as possible.   In addition, we recommended the Board correct any employee’s accrued absence balance noted as incorrect and recover any amounts owed by employees.

 

Board officials accepted the recommendation.

 

OTHER FINDINGS

 

     The remaining findings are reportedly being given attention by the Board.  We will review the Board's progress towards implementing our recommendations during the next examination period.

 

 

 

AUDITORS' OPINION

 

      The auditors qualified their report on State Compliance for findings 08-1, 08-2, and 08-3.  Except for the noncompliance described in these findings, the auditors state the Board complied, in all material respects, with the requirement described in the report.

 

 

 

 

_____________________________________

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND, Auditor General

 

 

WGH:GSR:pp

 

ASSIGNED AUDITORS

 

     The compliance examination was conducted by the Auditor General’s staff.