REPORT DIGEST

OFFICE OF THE STATE FIRE MARSHAL

COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION
FOR THE TWO YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2024

Release Date:  April 16, 2026

FINDINGS THIS AUDIT: 19

CATEGORY:  NEW -- REPEAT – TOTAL
Category 1:  4 -- 9 -- 13
Category 2:  1 -- 5 -- 6
Category 3:  0 -- 0 -- 0
TOTAL:  5 -- 14 – 19

FINDINGS LAST AUDIT: 23

State of Illinois, Office of the Auditor
General
FRANK J. MAUTINO, AUDITOR GENERAL

To obtain a copy of the Report contact:
Office of the Auditor General, 400 West
Monroe, Suite 306, Springfield, IL
62704-9849
(217) 782-6046 or TTY (888) 261-2887

This Report Digest and Full Report are also
available on the worldwide web at
www.auditor.illinois.gov

INTRODUCTION
SYNOPSIS

• (24-01) The Office did not exercise
adequate controls over its collection of
fees and accounts   receivable.
• (24-02) The Office did not always report
identified violations to the regional
superintendents.
• (24-03) The Office was not in compliance
with the Elevator Safety and Regulation
Act.

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER FEES AND ACCOUNTS
RECEIVABLE

The Office did not exercise adequate
controls over its collection of fees and
accounts receivable.

Some of the more significant exceptions
noted were:

• During review of the Office’s process for
collecting inspection fees for boilers and
pressure vessels, we noted the Office
lacked an adequate process for identifying
the party responsible for paying the fee.
The Office has three ways for triggering an
inspection by the Office, which lacked a
process to gather all information needed to
collect on the resulting account
receivable, such as the identity of the
responsible party and its corresponding
taxpayer identification number. Then, when
the actual inspection occurs, the Office’s
inspector only confirms the mailing address
and, if the person providing the inspector
access to the boiler is willing to provide
it, the e-mail address for the entity that
pays the building’s costs. After the
inspection, the Office sends an invoice to
the address confirmed by the inspector and,
if the amount is not timely paid, the
Office sends quarterly statements demanding
payment. Under this process, the Office
does not gather enough information to
establish and collect each account
receivable as established by the Illinois
State Collection Act of 1986.  The Illinois
State Collection Act of 1986 (30 ILCS
210/5(c-1) and (g)) requires the referral
of all delinquent debt to the Department of
Revenue’s Debt Collection Bureau (Bureau).

• For all remaining fees, the Office did
not refer any of its delinquent accounts
receivable to the Bureau.

• One of 2 (50%) tested accounts
receivable, totaling $1,126,827, was over
90 days delinquent but had not been
referred to the Comptroller’s Illinois Debt
Recovery Offset Portal system as of June
30, 2024.

• For one of 9 (11%) non-sufficient funds
checks tested, totaling $200, the Office
was unable to provide evidence that the
associated license was revoked, as
subsequent payment was not received.

• Nine of 16 (56%) fees listed in the
Fiscal Year 2022 and Fiscal Year 2023
Agency Fee Imposition Reports (Reports) had
total amounts reported that did not trace
to the Office’s support. This resulted in
an $81,947 understatement and $9,015
overstatement on the Fiscal Year 2022 and
Fiscal Year 2023 Reports, respectively.

• Eight of 16 (50%) fees listed in the
Fiscal Year 2022 and Fiscal Year 2023
Reports did not include all fees the Office
is authorized to charge. (Finding 1, pages
11-15).  This finding was first reported in
2018.

We recommended the Office implement
controls to obtain sufficient information
about responsible parties to enable the
collection of accounts receivable, or seek
a legislative remedy to require up-front
payment for an inspection at the time when
an inspection is scheduled. Additionally,
the Office should refer qualifying debt to
the Bureau and the Office of the
Comptroller for external collection
efforts. Further, we recommended the Office
implement controls to ensure licenses or
permits are revoked when NSF payments are
received. Finally, we recommended the
Office ensure its reports are accurately
completed and contain all of the required
information.

The Office agreed with the finding, noting
there are often issues determining what
party maintains ultimate responsibility for
a boiler or pressure vessel.  The Office
also pointed to a lack of authority per
State statute or administrative rule to
mandate collection of a TIN, and without
this information, the Office faces
difficulty in filing an offset or engaging
in other collection methods for delinquent
invoices.  The Office agreed that a license
for an NSF check was not revoked, and noted
Fiscal will communicate with the Divisions
in the future, when these situations occur.
The Office agreed with the errors noted in
the Fee Imposition Report and will work to
fix the errors in the next report
submission.

FAILURE TO REPORT SCHOOL FIRE INSPECTION
VIOLATIONS

The Office did not always report identified
violations to the regional superintendents
(superintendent) as follows:

• Fifty-six of 60 (93%) sampled inspections
of public schools conducted by the Office
or a qualified official to whom the Office
has delegated its authority during the
examination period contained violations
noted by the inspector. For those 56
inspections containing violations, we noted
13 (23%) reports with violations did not
have evidence the report had been submitted
to the superintendent, and 2 (4%) reports
with violations were reported to the
superintendent 1 and 8 days late.
In addition, for 12 (21%) reports with
violations, we were unable to determine
whether the report was sent to the
superintendent within 15 days after the
inspection as supporting documentation did
not include the date sent. (Finding 2,
pages 16-17).  This finding was first
reported in 2018.

We recommended the Office enhance its
internal controls to provide assurance
violation reports are timely sent to the
school’s applicable superintendent.
Further, the Office should ensure copies of
all inspections performed are retained.

The Office agreed with the finding. Office
officials indicated they created a new Life
Safety Checklist which includes a checkbox
indicating the Regional Office of Education
(ROE) received the report at the time of
inspection. If the box is unchecked, then
the Office requires Qualified Fire
Officials (QFOs) to upload a copy of the
email sent to the ROE in the Inspection
Software.  If a report is sent to the
Office that does not indicate that the ROE
received a copy on site, and a copy of the
email sent to the ROE was not provided,
then the report is returned to the QFO’s to
properly complete.

NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE ELEVATOR SAFETY AND
REGULATION ACT

The Office was not in compliance with the
Elevator Safety and Regulation Act (Act)
(225 ILCS 312).

Some of the more significant exceptions
noted were:

• We requested the Office provide us with a
population listing of registered
conveyances. After reviewing the population
provided, the auditor noted that there were
several inconsistent entries that affected
the reliability of the population.
Specifically, we noted 227 of 16,661 (1%)
registered conveyances were listed as
active, but had a last inspection date
entry of “N/A”. Due to this, it appears the
Office does not have sufficient controls in
place to protect against incorrect
information being entered into the Office’s
elevator certification system.

• For 31 of 60 (52%) conveyances selected
for testing, the Office could not locate a
copy of annual inspection reports to
substantiate the required inspection had
been performed.

• We requested the Office provide us with a
population listing of alleged violations in
relation to the Act (225 ILCS 312/105).
During discussions with the Office about
how the population was compiled, we noted
that the Office lacks internal controls
over the population. Specifically, the
Office does not have a way to track
investigation requests received, as the
Office receives these requests through a
variety of sources.

• Even given the population limitations, we
attempted to perform testing and noted that
for 60 of 60 (100%) of the alleged
violations selected for testing, the Office
was unable to provide documentation related
to the requests and determinations of
alleged violations. Therefore, we were
unable to complete testing to determine and
verify the Office was in compliance with
the requirements of the Act.  (Finding 3,
pages 18-21) This finding was first
reported in 2020.

We recommended the Office strengthen its
controls over the listing of registered
conveyances to ensure conveyances are
inspected as required and that
documentation of the inspections is
maintained. In addition, we recommended the
Office establish controls to track requests
received for investigations of alleged
violations under the Act and maintain
documentation to substantiate the alleged
violations were appropriately considered
for investigation. (Finding 3, pages 18-21)

This finding was first reported in 2020.

The Office agreed with the finding and
stated it was implementing corrective
action.

OTHER FINDINGS

The remaining findings are reportedly being
given attention by the Office.  We will
review the Office’s progress towards the
implementation of our recommendations in
our next State compliance examination.

ACCOUNTANT’S OPINION

The accountants conducted a State
compliance examination of the Office for
the two years ended June 30, 2024, as
required by the Illinois State Auditing
Act. The accountants qualified their report
on State compliance for Findings 2024-001
through 2024-013.  Except for the
noncompliance described in those findings,
the accountants stated the Office complied,
in all material respects, with the
requirements described in the report.

This State compliance examination was
conducted by the Office of the Auditor
General’s staff.

COURTNEY DZIERWA
Division Director

This report is transmitted in accordance
with Section 3-14 of the Illinois State
Auditing Act.

FRANK J. MAUTINO
Auditor General

FJM:AA