REPORT DIGEST

ILLINOIS STATE POLICE

STATE COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION
FOR THE TWO YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2022

Release Date:  April 13, 2023

FINDINGS THIS AUDIT: 39

CATEGORY:  NEW -- REPEAT -- TOTAL
Category 1:  3 -- 12 -- 15
Category 2:  10 -- 14 -- 24
Category 3:  0 -- 0 -- 0
TOTAL:  13 -- 26 -- 39

FINDINGS LAST AUDIT: 32

Category 1: Findings that are material
weaknesses in internal control and/or
a qualification on compliance with
State laws and regulations (material
noncompliance).
Category 2: Findings that are
significant deficiencies in internal
control and noncompliance with State
laws and regulations.
Category 3: Findings that have no
internal control issues but are in
noncompliance with State laws and
regulations.

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, 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
www.auditor.illinois.gov

INTRODUCTION

Because of the significance and
pervasiveness of the findings
described within the report, we
expressed an adverse opinion on the
Illinois State Police’s compliance
with specified requirements which
comprise a State compliance
examination. The Codification of
Statements on Standards for
Attestation Engagements (AT-C §
205.74) states a practitioner “should
express an adverse opinion when the
practitioner, having obtained
sufficient appropriate evidence,
concludes the misstatements,
individually or in the aggregate, are
both material and pervasive to the
subject matter.”
SYNOPSIS

• (22-01)  The Department did not
exercise adequate controls over State
property and equipment.
• (22-05)  The Department failed to
ensure separated employees were
properly removed from payroll.
• (22-09)  The Department did not
timely process Firearm Owners
Identification and Concealed Carry
applications.

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

INADQUATE CONTROLS OVER PROPERTY AND
EQUIPMENT

The Illinois State Police (Department)
did not exercise adequate controls
over State property and equipment.

Due to the following process and
control deficiencies identified below,
we were unable to conclude whether the
Department’s population records were
sufficiently precise and detailed
under the Attestation Standards
promulgated by the American Institute
of Certified Public Accountants (AT-C
§ 205.36) in order to test the
Department’s controls over State
property and equipment.

Even given the population limitations
noted above which hindered the ability
of the accountants to conclude whether
selected samples were representative
of the population as a whole, we
performed the following tests:

During review of the Department’s
Annual Certification of Inventory
discrepancy listings, we noted:

• The Department did not have adequate
controls over lost or missing
property. We noted 60 of 60 (100%)
items listed as lost or missing could
possibly have had confidential
information stored on them. In
addition, the Department was unable to
identify the use or the type of data
stored or placed on all 60 items.
Items included servers, computers,
laptops, tablets, and a video camera
with a memory card.
• Sixty of 60 (100%) equipment items
listed as lost or missing on the
Agency's discrepancy listing did not
have documentation documenting
encryption had been deployed and in
use on the equipment.

We noted the Department was unable to
reconcile the differences noted
between the Object Expense/
Expenditures by Quarter Report (SA02)
and the Agency’s Report of State
Property (C-15) reports. During the
engagement period, the Department had
$47,072,572 in gross equipment and
electronic data processing
expenditures.  However, $45,320,398 in
gross equipment and electronic data
processing expenditures were reported
on the C-15.

When attempting to reconcile the
Department’s Fiscal Year 2022
schedules of additions, deletions, and
transfers to the Department’s Fiscal
Year 2022 property control listing, we
noted $4,138,723 of unknown activity
that was not reported on the
Department’s Fiscal Year 2022
schedules of additions, deletions, and
transfers. The Department was unable
to identify the unknown activity.

When attempting to reconcile the
Department’s Fiscal Year 2021
schedules of additions, deletions, and
transfers to the Department’s Fiscal
Year 2021 property control listing, we
noted $5,059,628 of unknown activity
that was not reported on the
Department’s Fiscal Year 2021
schedules of additions, deletions, and
transfers. The Department was unable
to identify the unknown activity.

When testing for accuracy and
timeliness of the Department’s C-15
reports filed with the Comptroller, we
noted:

• The Department’s property records at
June 30, 2022 and 2021 did not agree
to the C-15 reports submitted to the
Comptroller by approximately
$5,474,228 and $5,203,028,
respectively. The Department was
unable to complete a reconciliation
between the Department’s records and
the C-15 reports at June 30, 2022 and
2021.
• The Department’s Fiscal Year 2022
and Fiscal Year 2021 records of
additions, deletions, and transfers
did not agree to the C-15 reports
submitted to the Comptroller by
$5,638,232 and $4,585,567,
respectively. The Department did not
attempt to prepare a reconciliation
between the Department’s Fiscal Year
2022 and Fiscal Year 2021 records of
additions, deletions, and transfers
and the C-15 reports.
• Two of eight (25%) C-15 reports
submitted to the Comptroller were
filed two and five days after the due
date.

During our testing of the Department’s
records for timely acquisition,
change, or deletion of equipment
items, we noted:

• Six of 60 (10%) equipment items,
totaling $371,143, were added to the
Department’s inventory records between
165 and 1,333 days from the date of
the acquisition.
• Nine of 60 (15%) equipment items,
totaling $118,851, were deleted from
the Department’s inventory records
between 36 and 868 days after the
disposal date of the property.
• Six of 60 (10%) equipment items,
totaling $125,558, were deleted from
the Department’s inventory records
between 22 and 646 days before the
disposal date of the property

During testing of the Department’s
records for proper recording of
transfers and deletions, we noted five
of 60 (8%) items, totaling $156,155,
did not have the correct acquisition
cost reported on the Surplus Property
Delivery form.

During testing of the Annual
Certification of Inventory, we noted:

• The Fiscal Year 2022 and Fiscal Year
2021 Annual Certification of Inventory
could be inaccurate based upon failure
to perform reconciliations of the
Department’s property records and the
Department not taking appropriate
measures to ensure the accuracy of the
annual physical counts of inventories.
The Fiscal Year 2022 Annual
Certification of Inventory reported
719 missing items totaling $1,533,460
of the total inventoried items. The
Fiscal Year 2021 Annual Certification
of Inventory reported 1,413 missing
items totaling $2,454,518 of the total
inventoried items.
• Eleven of 60 (18%) equipment items,
totaling $20,101, were reported on
both Fiscal Year 2022 and Fiscal Year
2021 Annual Certification of Inventory
as being unable to be located. Of the
eleven, four items, totaling $12,141,
were not removed from the Department’s
June 30, 2022 property records and
eleven items, totaling $20,101, were
not removed from the Department’s June
30, 2021 property records.

During testing of the Department’s
equipment additions, we noted:

• Eight of 60 (13%) items, totaling
$493,723, did not have supporting
documentation for the equipment
addition to the Department’s property
records.
• Seven of 60 (12%) items, totaling
$44,528, were recorded on the
Department's property records at the
incorrect value. The items netted to a
total overstatement of $9,344.

During forward (list to floor) and
backwards (floor to list) testing, we
noted the following:

• Seven of 60 (12%) items, totaling
$16,917, were unable to be located at
the Department. The un-located items
included a trailer, desk, tasers, and
radars.
• Three of 60 (5%) items, totaling
$17,909, were not tagged. The items
included a dispatch console, vehicle
topper shelter, and golf cart.
• Two of 60 (3%) items, totaling
$59,951, had a different tag number
than what was recorded on the
Department’s property records.
• One of 60 (2%) items located within
the Department were not found on the
Department’s property records. The
item was a data storage backup and
since the item was not recorded in the
Department’s records, the value could
not be determined.
• Seventeen of 120 (14%) items were
found in a different location than
indicated on the Department’s property
records.

During review of the Department’s
policies and directives, we noted the
Department did not have a policy
clearly delineating the categories of
equipment considered subject to theft.
(Finding 1, pages 12-18)  This finding
has been repeated since 2002.

We recommended the Department develop
procedures to immediately assess if an
electronic device may have contained
confidential information whenever it
is reported lost, stolen, or missing
during the annual physical inventory,
and document the results of the
assessment. We also recommended the
Department strengthen its controls to
ensure all equipment is accurately and
timely recorded or removed from the
Department’s property records and
ensure accurate reports are submitted
to the Comptroller. Furthermore, we
recommended the Department reconcile
its property records to the
Comptroller’s records and adopt a
policy clearly delineating the
categories of equipment considered to
be subject to theft.

The Department agreed with the finding
and stated they take the loss of
property, particularly property that
may contain confidential information
seriously and that the Department
began implementing measures in the
second half of Fiscal Year 2022 to
ensure adequate encryption of all
devices and to reduce the
vulnerability that possible loss would
pose.

The Department also stated it did not
have appropriate staffing for property
control since this function returned
to the Department from the Public
Safety Shared Service Center (PSSSC)
in 2019. This, combined with poor
records at the time the function
returned, has created a number of
challenges. The Department is
committed to cleaning up old records
and working toward sufficient training
and staffing going forward. By
investing in appropriate staffing and
sufficient training, the Department
intends to eliminate historical
inaccuracies and ensure accurate and
timely data entry and reconciliations
going forward.

FAILURE TO REMOVE EMPLOYEES FROM
PAYROLL

The Department failed to ensure
separated employees were properly
removed from payroll.

We reviewed personnel files and
payroll records for 12 employees,
which had separated during the
examination period, noting one (8%)
employee remained on payroll for
fourteen pay periods after separation.
As a result, the employee was overpaid
a total of $37,116. None of the
overpayments had been collected by the
Department as of November 2022.
(Finding 5, page 25)

We recommended the Department
strengthen its controls to ensure
personnel transactions are timely
implemented.  In addition, we
recommended the Department work with
the individual to obtain
reimbursement.

The Department agreed with the finding
and stated for the employee in
question, once the Department learned
of the issue, payroll immediately
notified the division, completed
documentation to remove the employee,
and initiated collection of the
overpayment.  In addition, Department
management stated process changes have
been made to ensure this issue is
addressed and will continue to monitor
its processes to prevent future
occurrences and that the Department
has established a tracking system for
overpayments of any payroll
disbursement of earnings.

FAILURE IN PROCESSING FOID AND
CONCEALED CARRY APPLICATIONS TIMELY

The Department did not timely process
Firearm Owners Identification (FOID)
and Concealed Carry applications.

During testing of FOID applications,
we noted:
• Five of 15 (33%) applications were
not processed within 30 days, with
delays ranging from 100 to 168 days.

• One of 15 (7%) renewal applications
was not processed within 60 business
days, with a delay of 18 days.

• Two of 15 (13%) card holders were
not notified their FOID cards were
expiring within 60 days.

• Three of 15 (20%) card holders were
not notified their FOID cards were
expiring within 180 days.

• The Department could not provide
documentation to demonstrate the FOID
card application fees were deposited
into the correct funds. During Fiscal
Years 2021 and 2022, the Department
reported collecting FOID application
and renewal applications fees totaling
$5,205,150 and 2,843,585,
respectively.

During testing of Concealed Carry
applications, we noted:

• Eighteen of 30 (60%) Concealed Carry
applications were not processed
timely, with delays ranging from two
to 453 days late.

• The Department could not provide
documentation to demonstrate the
Concealed Carry application fees were
deposited in accordance with the
Firearm Concealed Carry Act. During
Fiscal Years 2021 and 2022, the
Department reported collecting
Concealed Carry application and
renewal applications fees totaling
$22,516,177 and 15,763,178,
respectively.  (Finding 9, pages
36-38)

We recommended the Department allocate
the necessary resources to process
applications in a timely manner and
ensure documentation fees are
deposited in accordance with the Acts.

The Department concurred with this
finding and stated significant
resources have been devoted to
reducing the application backlog by
hiring 32 Firearm Eligibility Analysts
and 31 contractual employees during
the examination period and
streamlining the FOID application
process for applicants.   In addition,
Department management stated it will
seek a legislative change to address
these circumstances.  Lastly,
Department management stated it has
incorporated an automated process and
worked with the Treasurer’s Office to
utilize their platform to track
deposits and will continue working to
better document the process from fee
receipt to deposit to ensure fees
received match fees deposited.

OTHER FINDINGS

The remaining findings pertain to
accounts receivable, receipts, voucher
processing, reconciliations,
interagency agreements, noncompliance
with statutes, general Information
Technology controls, vehicles,
reporting, attendance records,
Internal Audit, performance
evaluations, payroll files, cell
phones, census data, liability
insurance certification, locally held
funds, and contracts.  We will review
the Department’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 Illinois
State Police State for the two years
ended June 30, 2022 as required by the
Act and the Illinois State Auditing
Act.  Because of the effect of
noncompliance described in findings
2022-001 through 2022-039, the
accountants stated the Department did
not materially comply with the
requirements described in the report.

JANE CLARK
Division Director

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

FRANK J. MAUTINO
Auditor General

FJM:mkl