FY11-CMS-Comp-Full

              ~ ·.
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL
MANAGEMENT SERVICES
COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION
For the Two Years Ended June 30, 2011
Performed as Special Assistant Auditors
For the Auditor General~ State of Illinois
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION
For the Two Years Ended June 30, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Agency Officials . . . .. . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Management Assertion Letter........................................................................................... 2
Compliance Report
Summary ............................................................................ ~...................................... 4
Accountant's Reports
Independent Accountants' Report on State Compliance, on Internal Control
Over Compliance, and on Supplementary Information for State Compliance
Purposes............................................................................................................... 8
Independent Auditors' Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and
on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements
Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards....................... 12
Schedule of Findings
Current Findings- Government Auditing Standards................................................ 14
Current Findings - State Compliance .. . . .. . . ... . ...... ......... ......... .. .. . . . . ... . ..... .. . . . . . . .. .. ... . . . . 19
Prior Findings Not Repeated...................................................................................... 51
Management Audit Follow-Up of2008 Joint Procurements of Bulk Rock Salt................... 53
Financial Statement Report
The Department's financial statement report for the year ended June 30, 2011, which
includes the report of independent auditors, basic financial statements and notes,
supplementary information, and the independent auditors' report on internal control over
financial reporting and on compliance and other matters based on an audit of financial
statements performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards has been
issued separately.
Supplementary Information for State Compliance Purposes
Summary ................................................................................................................... 54
Fiscal Schedules and Analysis
Schedule of Expenditures ofF ederal A wards
Year Ended June 30,2011 (Schedule!)......................................................... 55
Notes to the Schedule ofExpenditures of Federal Awards.................................. 56
Schedule of Appropriations, Expenditures and Lapsed Balances
Fiscal Year 2011 (Schedule 2)........................................................................ 58
Fiscal Year 201 0 (Schedule 2) ........ ... ............... ............. .... ....... .. .................... 59
Comparative Schedule ofNet Appropriations, Expenditures and
Lapsed Balances (Schedule 3) ........................................................................ 60
Schedule of Changes in State Property (Schedule 4)............................................ 66
Comparative Schedule of Cash Receipts and Reconciliation of Cash
Receipts to Deposits Remitted to the Comptroller (Schedule 5) .. .. .. .. .. .. .... .. .. 68
Analysis of Significant Variations in Expenditures.............................................. 73
Analysis of Significant Variations in Receipts..................................................... 77
Analysis of Significant Lapse Period Spending.................................................... 80
Analysis of Accounts Receivable
June 30, 2011 (Schedule 6) .................... .................. ....................................... 83
June 30, 2010 (Schedule 6)............................................................................. 84
Analysis of Operations
Agency Functions and Planning Program............................................................. 85
Average Number of Employees............................................................................ 87
Emergency Purchases
Year Ended June 30, 2011 (Schedule 7) ........................................................ 88
Year Ended June 30, 2010 (Schedule 7) ........................................................ 91
Debt Collection Board . . .. .. . . .. ... .. ... . . ... . .. . . .. .. . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . ... .. 93
Service Efforts and Accomplishments (Unaudited)............................................. 94
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Director
Assistant Directors
Chief Operating Officer
Chief Fiscal Officer
General Counsel
Chief Internal Auditor
AGENCY OFFICIALS
Mr. Malcolm Weems- Acting
(Effective June 16, 2011 through present)
Mr. James Sledge
(Through June 16, 2011)
Ms. Christine Cegelis
(Through May 31, 2011)
Mr. Steve McCurdy
Ms. Tasha Cruzat
(Effective September 20, 201 0)
Mr. Doug Kucia
(April1, 2010 through April24, 2010)
Ms. Elizabeth Nicholson
(Through September 21, 2009)
Mr. Paul Romiti
Ms. Nadine Lacombe
(Effective February 10, 2010)
Ms. Debra Matlock
(Through December 31, 2009)
Mr. Spenser Staton
(Effective September 16, 201 0)
Ms. Carol Kraus
(Through October 13, 2009)
AGENCY OFFICE LOCATION
715 Stratton Office Building
401 South Spring Street
Springfield, IL 62706
1
April 3, 2012
Sikich LLP
I L L I N 0 I S Pat Quinn, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Malcolm Weems, Acting Director
MANAGEMENT ASSERTION LETTER
Certified Public Accountants
3201 West White Oaks Drive, Suite 102
Springfield, IL 62704.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We are responsible for the identification of, and compliance with, all aspects of laws,
regulations, contracts, or grant agreements that could have a material effect on the
operations of the Department. We are responsible for and we have established and
maintained an effective system of internal controls over compliance requirements. We
have performed an evaluation of the Department's compliance with the following
assertions during the two year period ended June 30, 2011. Based on this evaluation,
we assert that during the years ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2011, the
Department has materially complied with the assertions below.
A. The Department has obligated, expended, received and used public funds of the
State in accordance with the purpose for which such funds have been
appropriated or otherwise authorized by law.
B. The Department has obligated, expended, received and used public funds of the
State in accordance with any limitations, restrictions, conditions or mandatory
directions imposed by law upon such obligation, expenditure, receipt or use.
C. The Department has complied, in all material respects, with applicable laws and
regulations, including the State uniform accounting system, in its financial and
fiscal operations.
D. State revenues and receipts collected by the Department are in accordance with
applicable laws and regulations and the accounting and recordkeeping of such
revenues and receipts is fair, accurate and in accordance with law.
715 Stratton Office Building, 401 South Spring Street, Springfield, IL 62706
Printed on Recycled Paper
2
E. Money or negotiable securities or similar assets handled by the Department on
behalf of the State or held in trust by the Department have been properly and
legally administered, and the accounting and recordkeeping relating thereto is
proper, accurate and in accordance with law.
Yours very truly,
Department of Central Management Services
Paul Romiti, Fiscal Officer
Nadine Lacombe, General Counsel
3
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
COMPLIANCE REPORT
SUMMARY
The compliance testing performed during this examination was conducted in accordance with
Government Auditing Standards and in accordance with the Illinois State Auditing Act.
ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT
The Independent Accountants' Report on State Compliance, on Internal Control Over
Compliance and on Supplementary Information for State Compliance Purposes does not contain
scope limitations, disclaimers, or other significant non-standard language.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Number of
Findings
Repeated findings
Prior recommendations implemented
or not repeated
Current
Report
16
12
7
Details of findings are presented at pages 14 through 50 of this report.
·Item
Number Page
SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS
Description
Prior
Report
19
18
6
Finding Type
FINDINGS (GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS)
11-1
11-2
14 Weaknesses in internal control over financial
reporting
17 Inadequate security and control over the midrange
environment
4
Material
Weakness and
Material
Noncompliance
Significant
Deficiency
Item
Number _Page Description Finding Type
FINDINGS (STATE COMPLIANCE)
11-3 19 Inadequate control over property and equipment Significant
Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-4 21 Inadequate justification for cancellation of a
procurement of temporary staffing services Significant
master contract Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-5 25 Weaknesses in controls over payments to employees Significant
related to leave of absence Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-6 27 Failure to establish a prescription drug benefit Significant
program for school districts Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-7 28 Inadequate software licensing monitming Significant
Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-8 30 Failure to meet statutory reporting requirements Significant
Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-9 32 Noncompliance with the Fiscal Control and Internal Significant
Auditing Act Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-10 35 Documentation of Chief Internal Auditor Significant
experience and training not sufficient Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-11 37 Follow up to management audit of the Department's Significant
Administration of the Business Enterprise Program Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-12 41 Surplus property management process weaknesses Significant
Deficiency and
Noncompliance
11-·13 43 Not timely in filing contracts with the Comptroller Significant
Deficiency and
Noncompliance
5
Item
Number
11-14
11-·15
11-16
Page Description Finding Type
FINDINGS (STATE COMPLIANCE)- (Continued)
45 Failure to develop rules or policies describing the
State employees' group insurance program
4 7 Inadequate monitoring of interagency agreements
49 A voidable use of emergency contracts
Significant
Deficiency and
Noncompliance
Significant
Deficiency and
Noncompliance
Significant
Deficiency and
Noncompliance
In addition, the following findings which are reported as current findings related to Government
Auditing Standards also meet the reporting requirements for State Compliance.
11-1
11-2
14 Weaknesses in internal control over financial
reporting
17 Inadequate security and control over the midrange
environment
6
Material
Weakness and
Noncompliance
Significant
Deficiency
Item
Number
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
51
51
51
52
52
52
52
Description
PRIOR FINDINGS NOT REPEATED
Excess retained earnings balances representing noncompliance with
federal regulations
Reporting of costs not in accordance with federal regulations
Incomplete and inaccurate records over computer
systems and equipment
Inadequate disaster contingency planning
Time sheets not maintained in compliance with the
State Officials and Employees Ethics Act
Leases in holdover status
Late approval and payment of vouchers
EXIT CONFERENCE
The findings and recommendations appearing in this report were discussed with Department
personnel at an exit conference on March 28, 2012. Attending were:
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Paul Romiti, Chief Fiscal Officer
Tammy Compton, Fiscal
Roger Nondorf, Chief Administrative Officer
Amy Walter, Internal Auditor
Denise Reed, Administrative Assistant
OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL
Terri Davis, Audit Manager
SIKICHLLP
Gary Neubauer, Partner
Megan Cochran, Supervisor
Amy De Weese, Senior Accountant
The responses to the recommendations were provided by Paul Romiti in a letter dated April 3,
2012.
7
~Sikich.
Certified Public Accountants & Business Advisors
Members of American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants
3201 West White Oaks Drive, Suite 102 • Springfield, IL 62704
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT ON STATE COMPLIANCE,
ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE, AND ON
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FOR STATE COMPLIANCE PURPOSES
Honorable William G. Holland
Auditor General
State of Illinois
Compliance
As Special Assistant Auditors for the Auditor General, we have examined the State of Illinois,
Department of Central Management Services' (the Department's) compliance with the
requirements listed below, as more fully described in the Audit Guide for Financial Audits and
Compliance Attestation Engagements of Illinois State Agencies (Audit Guide) as adopted by the
Auditor General, during the two years ended June 30, 2011. The management of the Department
is responsible for compliance with these requirements. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on the Department's compliance based on our examination.
A. The Department has obligated, expended, received, and used public funds of the State in
accordance with the purpose for which such funds have been appropriated or otherwise
authorized by law.
B. The Department has obligated, expended, received, and used public funds of the State in
accordance with any limitations, restrictions, conditions or mandatory directions imposed
by law upon such obligation, expenditure, receipt or use.
C. The Department has complied, in all material respects, with applicable laws and
regulations, including the State uniform accounting system, in its financial and fiscal
operations.
D. State revenues and receipts collected by the Department are in accordance with
applicable laws and regulations and the accounting and recordkeeping of such revenues
and receipts is fair, accurate and in accordance with law.
E. Money or negotiable securities or similar assets handled by the Department on behalf of
the State or held in trust by the Department have been properly and legally administered
and the accounting and recordkeeping relating thereto is proper, accurate, and in
accordance with law.
8
We conducted our examination in accordance with attestation standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants; the standards applicable to attestation
engagements contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of
the United States; the Illinois State Auditing Act (Act); and the Audit Guide as adopted by the
Auditor General pursuant to the Act; and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis,
evidence about the Department's compliance with those requirements listed in the first paragraph
of this report and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Department's compliance with
specified requirements.
As described in finding 11-1 in the accompanying schedule of findings, the Department did not
comply with requirements regarding:
C. The Department has complied, in all material respects, with applicable laws and
regulations, including the State uniform accounting system, in its financial and fiscal
operations.
Compliance with such requirements is necessary, in our opinion, for the Department to comply
with the requirements listed in the first paragraph of this report.
In our opinion, except for the noncompliance described in the preceding paragraph, the
Department complied, in all material respects, with the compliance requirements listed in the
first paragraph of this report during the two years ended June 30, 2011. However, the results of
our procedures disclosed instances of noncompliance with those requirements, which are
required to be reported in accordance with criteria established by the Audit Guide, issued by the
Illinois Office of the Auditor General and which are described in the accompanying schedule of
findings as findings 11-3 through 11-16.
Internal Control
Management of the Department is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal
control over compliance with the requirements listed in the first paragraph of this report. In
planning and performing our examination, we considered the Department's internal control over
compliance with the requirements listed in the first paragraph of this report as a basis for
designing our examination procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on compliance
and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with the Audit Guide,
issued by the Illinois Office of the Auditor General, but not for the purpose of expressing an
opinion on the effectiveness of the Department's internal control over compliance. Accordingly,
we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Department's internal control over
compliance.
Our consideration of internal control over compliance was for the limited purpose described in
the preceding paragraph and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control over
compliance that might be significant deficiencies or material weaknesses and therefore, there can
be no assurance that all deficiencies, significant deficiencies, or material weaknesses have been
9
identified. However, as described in the accompanying schedule of findings, we identified
certain deficiencies in internal control over compliance that we considered to be material
weaknesses and other deficiencies that we consider to be significant deficiencies.
A deficiency in an entity's internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation
of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of
performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with the
requirements listed in the first paragraph of this report on a timely basis. A material weakness in
internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal
control over compliance such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material noncompliance
with a requirement listed in the first paragraph of this report will not be prevented, or detected
and corrected on a timely basis. We consider the deficiencies in internal control over compliance
as described in the accompanying schedule of findings as item 11-1 to be a material weakness.
A significant deficiency in an entity's internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a
combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance that is less severe than a
material weakness in internal control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention
by those charged with governance. We consider the deficiencies in internal control over
compliance described in the accompanying schedule of findings as items 11-2 through 11-16 to
be significant deficiencies
As required by the Audit Guide, immaterial findings excluded from this report have been
reported in a separate letter to your office.
The Department's responses to the findings identified in our examination are described in the
accompanying schedule of findings. We did not examine the Department's responses and,
accordingly, we express no opinion on the responses.
Supplementary Information for State Compliance Purposes
As Special Assistant Auditors for the Auditor General, we have audited the financial statements
of the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of
the Department as of and for the year ended June 30, 2011, which collectively comprise the
Department's basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated Apri13, 2012.
The accompanying supplementary information, as listed in the table of contents as
Supplementary Information for State Compliance Purposes, is presented for purposes of
additional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements of the Department.
The 2011 Supplementary Information for State Compliance Purposes, except for that portion
marked "unaudited" on which we express no opinion, has been subjected to the auditing
procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly
stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements for the year ended
June 30,2011 taken as a whole.
10
We have also previously audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the
United States, the Department's basic financial statements for the years ended June 30, 2010 and
2009. In our reports dated March 4, 2011 and March 25, 2010, we expressed unqualified
opinions on the respective financial statements of the governmental activities, each major fund,
and the aggregate remaining fund information. In our opinion, the 201 0 and 2009
Supplementary Information for State Compliance Purposes, except for the portion marked
"unaudited" is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements for
the years ended June 30,2010 and 2009, taken as a whole.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Auditor General, the General
Assembly, the Legislative Audit Commission, the Governor and agency management, and is not
intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Springfield, Illinois
April 3, 2012
11
~Sikich.
Certified Public Accountants & Business Advisors
Members of American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants
3201 West White Oaks Drive, Suite 102 • Springfield, IL 62704
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL
REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON
AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
Honorable William G. Holland
Auditor General
State of Illinois
As Special Assistant Auditors for the Auditor General, we have audited the financial statements of
the governmental activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the
State of Illinois, Department of Central Management Services as of and for the year ended June 30,
2011, which collectively comprise the State of Illinois, Department of Central Management
Services' basic financial statements and have issued our report thereon dated April3, 2012. We
conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States
of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing
Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management of the State of Illinois, Department of Central Management Services is responsible for
establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting. In planning and
performing our audit, we considered the State of Illinois, Department of Central Management
Services' internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing our auditing procedures
for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of
expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the State ofillinois, Department of Central
Management Services' internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an
opinion on the effectiveness of the State of Illinois, Department of Central Management Services'
internal control over financial reporting.
Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose
described in the preceding paragraph and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in the
internal control over financial reporting that might be significant deficiencies or material
weaknesses and therefore, there can be no assurance that all deficiencies, significant
deficiencies, or material weaknesses have been identified. However, as described in the
accompanying schedule of findings we identified certain deficiencies in internal control over
financial reporting that we consider to be a material weakness and other deficiencies that we
consider to be significant deficiencies.
12
A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow
management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent,
or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a
combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a
material misstatement of the entity's financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and
corrected on a timely basis. We consider the deficiencies described in finding 11-1 in the
accompanying schedule of findings to be a material weakness.
A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over
financial reporting that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit
attention by those charged with governance. We consider the deficiencies described in finding 11-2
in the accompanying schedule of findings to be a significant deficiency.
Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the State of Illinois, Department of Central
Management Services' financial statements are free of material misstatement, we performed tests of
its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements,
noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the determination of financial
statement amounts. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not
an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our
tests disclosed instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under
Government Auditing Standards and which are described in the accompanying schedule of findings
as item 11-1.
The State of Illinois, Department of Central Management Services' responses to the findings
identified in our audit are described in the accompanying schedule of findings. We did not audit
the State oflllinois, Department of Central Management Services' responses and, accordingly,
we express no opinion on the responses.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Auditor General, the General
Assembly, the Legislative Audit Commission, the Governor and Department management, and is
not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Springfield, Illinois
April3, 2012
13
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
CURRENT FINDINGS­GOVERNMENT
AUDITING STANDARDS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011
11-1 FINDING: (Weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting)
The Department's year-end financial reporting in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP) to the Illinois Office of the State Comptroller contained
significant errors in the determination of certain year-end account balances and note
disclosures.
The Illinois Office ofthe State Comptroller (IOC) requires State agencies to prepare
year-end financial reports (GAAP Reporting Packages) for each of their funds to assist in
the annual preparation of the statewide financial statements and the Department's
financial statements. GAAP Reporting Package instructions are specified in the
Statewide Accounting Management System (SAMS) Manual, Chapter 27. Management
is responsible for adopting sound accounting policies and for establishing and
maintaining internal controls that will, among other things, initiate, authorize, record,
process, and report financial data reliably and consistent with management's assertions
embodied in the financial statements.
During our audit ofthe June 30, 2011 financial statements, we noted material weaknesses
and significant deficiencies resulting from the Department's failure to establish adequate
internal control over the accumulation of information necessary for the proper reporting
of financial information as follows:
• The Department is responsible for recording a liability for workers'
compensation claims for injuries incurred before year-end that are probable of
resulting in an award. This liability is to include estimated losses for pending or
claims considered to be in the process ofbeing awarded at the end of the fiscal
year as well as estimated losses for claims that are unreported at year-end. The
Department currently uses a methodology that includes an estimate of pension­type
awards likely to be paid for injuries already incurred. The Department
estimated this portion of the total workers' compensation liability by calculating
an average annual number of new awards being paid over the last five fiscal
years. Utilizing this methodology, the Department has estimated only 36
pension-type awards with a cost of $24 million that will be made in the future for
injuries incurred prior to June 30, 2011. This methodology does not include any
consideration of historical information relating to the date of the injury to the
period when pension-type payments would begin. Based on information
maintained by the Department relating to current pension-type awards being
paid, it takes in excess of three years from the date of injury before payments
begin on pension-type awards for 87% of the claims. As such, we believe
14
claims with approximate awards of $93 million represent a more reasonable
estimate of the future pension-type awards to be made for injuries incurred prior
to June 30, 2011. This results in an understatement of the liability in the
Department's financial statements of approximately $69 million. The estimate
would be more accurate if actuarially calculated based on projected outcomes
based on facts and circumstances inherent in the individual claims and by
applying a consistent and supported assessment of those individual claims.
Department officials have stated the determination of a liability on an individual
case basis is not feasible given competing priorities and staffing issues. They
further stated the suggested methodology seems labor intensive and assumes that
the authority, skill sets and staffing will be consistently available for someone to
continually assess all the items on the pending claims listing. The Department
has adjusted the financial statements to record the additional liability.
• We noted several other errors in the preparation of the Department's financial
statements. The errors included improperly calculating the amount reported as
"invested in capital assets, net of related debt," overstating accounts payable,
failure to eliminate all inter-department charges for internal service fund activity,
errors in the allocation of functional expenses, and errors in the calculation of the
current year lease payments and the future minimum lease payments in the
operating leases footnote. The errors noted were not individually significant to
the financial statements taken as a whole; however, the Department did not have
effective controls over the reconciliation and review functions to ensure amounts
were properly reported at June 30, 2011. Department officials have stated that
the Department completes GAAP packages in accordance with deadlines
established by the IOC. Data is compiled from various agency accounting sub
systems into GAAP format. Estimates must be used and thresholds applied to
complete required reporting in the timeframe imposed. Final fiscal year
reconciliations of agency records are then completed as part of the normal
financial reporting process. Any resulting differences are identified and if
material, communicated to the IOC for adjustment in GAAP. The identified
items were not material to either the Department statements or the Statewide
statements; however, the Department did record adjustments for the elimination
of inter-department charges and the allocation of functional expenses.
• The Department did not perform a physical count of the commodities inventory
on hand at any of the twelve commodity storage locations and was unable to
provide a value of the inventory on hand at June 30, 2011. The Department also
has not developed or maintained oversight policies and procedures regarding the
commodities inventory. Procedures over commodities inventory should include
maintaining perpetual inventory records and periodically reconciling records to
physical counts. Generally accepted accounting principles also require the
proper valuation of inventory for financial reporting purposes. While the
commodities inventory balance was not deemed material to the 2011 financial
statements, the lack of a physical count or procedures over the commodities
inventory does not provide for the determination of a value of the commodities
inventory balance at the end of the fiscal year. Future year financial statements
could be misstated as a result.
15
As a result of these deficiencies, the Department's financial statements required material
adjustments at June 30, 2011 and other financial information was inaccurate. (Finding
Code No. 11-1, 10-1, 09-1, 08-4, 07-4)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department implement procedures to ensure GAAP Reporting
Packages prepared and submitted to the Office of the State Comptroller for financial
reporting purposes are complete and accurate. We further recommend the Department
utilize an actuary to estimate the workers' compensation liability or establish a
methodology to more reasonably estimate the outstanding pension-type workers'
compensation liability by utilizing a case-by-case analysis for known claims and more
relevant historical information for other probable claim losses.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department agrees with the recommendations.
Except for the finding related to the Workers' Compensation calculation, the items
detailed above were not material to the Department statements or the statewide
statements.
An adjustment was posted to the financial statements for the additional Workers'
Compensation liability. The Department plans to contract with an actuary for assistance
with future Workers' Compensation liability calculations. In addition, CMS financial
staff will examine actual liability figures and compare them with the CMS estimates ($24
million) and auditors' estimates ($93 million). Based on these comparisons and
improved data collection, we will consider any additional historical and current period
injury related variables that affect the accuracy of the estimating methodology and make
the necessary improvements to enhance accuracy.
The Department continues to cross train and encourage communication and awareness
among fiscal and Shared Service Center accounting staff regarding fiscal transactions and
the related financial statement treatment. Increased review of financial reports and in
particular lapse period transactions continues to be a major focus of the Department. The
Department is also working with the Shared Services center on documenting the internal
GAAP process.
In terms of commodities inventory, it is Department practice to only purchase
commodities sufficient to meet short-term needs. We do not stockpile commodities. We
agree to document a policy outlining our commodities purchasing practices.
16
11-2 FINDING: (Inadequate security and control over the midrange environment)
Although the consolidation was authorized in January 2005, the Department had not
implemented adequate security and controls over the midrange environment.
20 ILCS 405/405-410, effective January 15, 2005, mandated the Department to
consolidate Information Technology functions of State government. Due to the
consolidation, eleven agencies' IT functions were consolidated into the Department. As a
result of the consolidation, the Department became responsible for the security and
control of the midrange environment.
Although the Department had implemented standards to secure and control the midrange
environment, the standards did not require widespread deployment to legacy systems. As
such, the Department still had not implemented effective security controls over all servers
in the midrange environment.
Upon review, we noted standards had not been consistently applied on all servers.
Specifically, we noted servers:
• Running unsupported operating systems or service pack versions,
• Without anti-virus software,
• Not properly backed up,
• With deficient password length and content requirements,
• With administrative and user accounts which did not require passwords.
Additionally, we noted the Department had not conducted a comprehensive review of
individuals with administrative rights to the environment, to ensure appropriateness.
Although the Department shares responsibility with consolidated agencies, the
Department has the ultimate responsibility to effectively secure and control its midrange
environment which supports agency applications and data. As outlined in 20 ILCS
405/405-10 (4)- It shall be the duty of the Director and the policy of the State of Illinois
to manage or delegate the management of the procurement, retention, installation,
maintenance, and operation of all electronic data processing equipment used by State
agencies in a manner that provides for adequate security protection. Since the
Department has primary control over the midrange environment, it was incumbent upon
them to ensure adequate controls existed to protect agency applications and data. In
addition, generally accepted information technology guidance endorses the development
of well-designed and well-managed controls to protect computer systems and data.
Effective computer security controls provide for safeguarding, securing, and controlling
access to hardware, software, and the information stored in the computer system.
Department officials stated while many new comprehensive policies, standards,
procedures, processes and associated tools have been developed and implemented to
properly address the issues, there are a large number of older systems running on data
center servers that cannot be updated until agencies upgrade their applications.
17
Many of the processes that are required to properly secure the midrange environment are
very complex and must be fully tested to ensure that existing agency applications are not
impacted by installing operating system updates, anti-virus protection, and/or patches.
These legacy agency applications were designed and developed to run on hardware and
systems that have since become obsolete - converting the applications to the latest
systems is an expensive and lengthy process. Progress in these areas and the other
elements in the finding have been hampered over the past few years by staff shortages
and financial constraints, neither of which we anticipate will be improving in the near
future.
Without the implementation of adequate controls and procedures, there is a greater risk
unauthorized access to the Department or agency resources may be gained and data
destroyed or misused. Prudent business practices dictate the Department strengthen its
security to protect its assets and resources against unauthorized access and misuse.
(Finding Code No. 11-2, 10-2, 09-4, 08-7, 07-11)
RECOMMENDATION:
The Department should ensure the standards to secure and control the environment are
implemented across the midrange environment.
Specifically the Department should:
• Standardize password length and content requirements and ensure all accounts
require a password.
• Update servers to current vendor recommended patch or service pack levels.
• Ensure all servers are running antivirus software.
• Ensure all servers are routinely backed up.
• Conduct a comprehensive review of individuals with administrative rights to
ensure appropriateness.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs and will continue to strive toward standardization and maturity
in the midrange environment.
The Department has implemented numerous policies, standards, processes, procedures
and tools to help address these issues. Due to the size and nature of the disparate
environment, many of the legacy agency environments do not fully meet the standards,
but we are working to improve these environments and working with the agencies to
update applications where needed. Implementing these changes is very time and resource
consuming in such a large and diverse environment.
18
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
CURRENT FINDINGS -
STATE COMPLIANCE
FOR THE TWO YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2011
11-3 FINDING: (Inadequate control over property and equipment)
The Department has not provided adequate control over property and equipment. We tested
the physical inventory and location of equipment and equipment transfers, and noted
deficiencies as described below.
Physical Inventory and Location of Equipment
During our testing of the physical inventory and location of equipment, we selected a
sample of 60 items noting the following weaknesses in internal controls:
• Four items valued at $1,806 could not be located. These items include the following:
wireless network adaptor, desk, vacuum and a folding table.
• Four items valued at $9,799 were not located on the "Items Over $500" report despite
meeting the criteria for inclusion. These items include the following: desktop CPU,
monitor mount, storage equipment and a power source.
• Two items valued at $56,155 were deemed obsolete but still included in the property
listing. The items, an external storage system and a color printer, were not sent to
surplus property for appropriate disposition.
• Three items valued at $1,159 were found at locations other than the location listed in
the property records. These items include the following: monitor, storage cabinet and
a transformer system.
The State Property Control Act (30 ILCS 605/4) requires the Department be accountable
for the supervision, control and inventory of all property under its jurisdiction and
control. In addition, good internal control procedures require the proper tracking of
property and equipment. The Department has procedures to track the movement of
equipment throughout the Department, but these procedures were not followed in all
cases.
In addition, the Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act (30 ILCS 10/3001) requires all
State agencies to establish and maintain a system of internal and fiscal control to provide
assurance that funds, property, and other assets are safeguarded against waste, loss,
unauthorized use and misappropriation.
Department officials have stated the inventory system has over 50,000 items valued in
excess of$224 million at 329locations controlled by 167 property control coordinators and,
property control usually takes a low priority in the many duties of the coordinators.
19
Furthermore, the Department is using an antiquated property control system that does not
contain adequate efficiencies or effectiveness to properly monitor and account for inventory.
Eguipment Transfers
During our testing of transfers of property and equipment, we noted one item with an
original cost of $225,000 did not have the purchase price included on the Surplus
Property Delivery Form as required by the Illinois Administrative Code (44 Ill. Adm.
Code 5010.310). In addition, one item with an original cost of$6,850 did not have the
purchase price or purchase date on the Vehicle Acquisition & Change Report as required
by the Illinois Administrative Code ( 44 Ill. Adm. Code 501 0.320). Finally, we noted one
interagency transfer with an original cost of$11,812 for which the Department did not
retain a signed receipt from a representative of the receiving agency. Illinois
Administrative Code (44 Ill. Adm. Code 5010.310) requires the Department to retain a
signed receipt from a representative of the receiving agency for transferable property.
Department officials have stated that there is a lack of staff knowledge within many
agencies with procedures regarding proper documentation on the surplus property delivery
forms.
Failure to maintain accurate property control records increases the potential for theft or
misappropriation of State assets. In addition, property improperly included on the
Department's inventory may result in inaccurate fixed assets reports and misstated
financial information. However, all of the errors noted above were immaterial to the
financial statements, and therefore, no adjustments to the financial statements were
necessary. (Finding Code No. 11-3,09-6, 08-6, 07-10,06-10, 05-18,04-18, 02-1)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department implement adequate controls and procedures to ensure
property and equipment is properly safeguarded and records are complete and accurate
and properly complete and maintain supporting documentation for transfers.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs that existing inventory and transfer procedures should be
followed more closely. We continue to improve training in this area. The Department
notes that ofthe 13 items listed in the finding valued at $68,919, only 4 items valued at
$1,806 could not be located, a significant improvement from the prior audit.
20
11-4 FINDING: (Inadequate justification for cancellation of a procurement of temporary
staffing services master contract)
The Department lacked adequate justification for the cancellation of a Request for Proposal
(RFP) for temporary staffing services. In addition, the Department effectively limited
competition in the subsequent Invitation for Bid (IFB) through establishment of criteria
which ultimately resulted in the disqualification of all but one vendor, the incumbent, which
responded to the IFB.
During the current period, the procurement and award files for 14 solicitations, contracts, or
renewals awarded in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 were selected for testing, totaling a
maximum award amount of approximately $339.3 million. In 1 of the 14 (7%) contracts
reviewed, a $12.7 million, (including potential extensions) master contract to provide
temporary staffing services for Cook County, the Department cancelled the original RFP
procurement without adequate justification and subsequently awarded a contract under an
IFB that effectively limited competition. The RFPIIFB specifications included estimated
hours for various base services plus estimated additional skills to be provided under the
contract. This contract was procured prior to·the establishment of the Executive Ethics
Commission.
The lllinois Procurement Code (30 ILCS 500/20-15 states that " ... when the purchasing
agency dete1mines in writing that the use of competitive sealed bidding is either not
practicable or not advantageous to the State, a contract may be entered into by competitive
sealed proposals." The Department, in the Economic Justification section of the
Procurement Business Case for the RFP stated "Releasing a Request for Proposals would
allow the State to evaluate vendors to select the most qualified vendors to serve as a
primary, secondary and tertiary provider. Issuing an Invitation for Bids would not allow the
State to evaluate vendors which may result in entering into a contract with a vendor whose
level of expertise does not meet the needs of the State."
In documenting the justification for the cancellation, the Department stated the State would
incur an approximate 31% increase in total costs based on estimated usage if the proposer
with the highest point total (Vendor A) were awarded the contract. This justification is
flawed for the following reasons:
1. The RFP requested rate per hour pricing information for base services and price quotes
for additional skills/services needed by the State. Vendor A received the highest point
total based on the evaluation of technical capabilities and price in part because they only
proposed hourly rates for base services with no cost to the State for additional
skills/services to be provided under the contract. This proposal did not result in the
lowest cost to the State. However, the stated 31% increase in costs only compared the
base costs estimated to be paid to the Incumbent under the current contract to the total
estimated costs bid by Vendor A. Had total costs, including costs for additional
skills/services, been compared for the entire potential length of the contract, the
difference between the current Incumbent cost and the proposed Vendor A cost was
only 10%. To represent the Vendor A proposal would result in a 31% increase was
misleading.
21
2. Under the RFP, the Incumbent's proposed total costs would have resulted in an increase
of3.8% over the costs being charged by Incumbent using current contract pricing.
3. The evaluation of the proposals failed to adequately consider that three other proposers
received the second, third, and fifth highest total point score from the evaluation and
actually submitted a proposal that would have resulted in a savings to the State when
compared to the costs being incurred under the current Incumbent contract, as
summarized in the following table:
Amount Over (Under)
Proposal Scoring Estimated Price Existing Contract (a)
Base With Renewals
Proposer Technical Price Total Base With Renewals $6,756,710 $13,513,421
Vendor A 430 500 930 $ 7,434,437 $ 14,868,874 $ 677,727 $ 1,355,453
VendorB 454 427 881 6,654,065 13,342,861 (102,645) (170,560)
VendorC 442 423 865 6,117,102 12,404,624 (639,608) (I' 1 08, 797)
VendorD 453 384 837 7,301,850 14,629,435 545,140 1,116,014
VendorE 435 383 818 6,651,382 13,354,568 (105,328) (158,853)
VendorF
(Incumbent) 455 360 815 6,760,674 14,012,113 3,964 498,692
(a) Represents estimated total cost to the State under the existing contract with the Incumbent based on
estimated demand as specified in the proposal/bid documents. For purposes of this comparison, no price
increase is assumed for the proposal period.
As specified in section 1.11 of the RFP, the Department stipulated to all proposers that "We
may accept or reject your Offer as submitted, or may require contract negotiations. If
negotiations do not result in an acceptable agreement, we may reject your Offer and begin
negotiations with another Vendor." The Department solicited best-and-final offers but there
is no documentation negotiations were conducted with any of the proposers.
Once the RFP procurement was cancelled, the Department changed the procurement method
to an Invitation for Bid. For the IFB solicitation, Section 2.1.3 .2 required vendors to meet
the following: "Vendors must have at least five years experience in providing like or similar
temporary employee job classifications and additional skills, during which time Vendors
must have at least three years experience in meeting the yearly estimated demand of hours in
the job classifications required in the contract." The yearly estimate of hours represented the
approximate actual hours of service provided by the Incumbent for the actual positions
filled. There were a total of 12 vendors who submitted bids for the IFB. Three of the
vendors were disqualified due to not providing the small business registration form with
their bid. Eight other vendors were disqualified because it was determined they did not
specifically meet the experience and hour demand requirements filling the exact positions as
referenced above. This resulted in the award of these services to the Incumbent vendor, who
submitted the third lowest price of the 12 vendors and was the only vendor deemed
responsive.
22
The Illinois Procurement Code (30 ILCS 50011-15.80) defines a responsible bidder or
offeror as" ... a person who has the capability in all respects to perform fully the contract
requirements and the integrity and reliability that will assure good faith performance." The
Code (30 ILCS 500/1-15.85) further defines a responsive bidder as " ... a person who has
submitted a bid that conforms in all material respects to the invitation for bids."
Six of the 17 vendors who submitted bids for the RFP also submitted bids for the IFB. The
RFP evaluation resulted in all vendors being considered responsive and responsible, that is,
fully capable in all respects to perform the contract. However, for the IFB, five of these
same vendors considered responsible in the RFP solicitation were considered non­responsive
and disqualified from being considered for the award even though the scope of
services was not changed. Three of these same vendors also scored higher than the
Incumbent in the technical evaluation category of the RFP relating to assessment of the
vendor's ability to meet the demand hour placement requirements and a history in fulfilling
like or similar job classifications.
Cancelling a competitive Request for Proposal procurement without adequate justification
represents a failure to comply with the intent of the Procurement Code to enable agencies to
procure goods or services utilizing a methodology designed to be most advantageous to the
State. Establishing criteria under an Invitation for Bid procurement that are so restrictive as
to result in the disqualification of all but one bidder fails to promote competition as required
by the Procurement Code. (Finding Code No. 11-4)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department establish appropriate controls to ensure the procurement
process is conducted in a fair and open manner that does not restrict or exclude any
potential bidders.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department agrees that appropriate controls are necessary to ensure that procurement
processes are conducted in a fair and open manner that does not restrict competition.
This is a commitment taken very seriously within the agency and processes are in place
to sufficiently and effectively monitor RFP and IFB execution.
The decision to cancel the RFP was related to statewide efforts related to cost
containment and the Agency determined cancellation to be in the best interest of the
State. This was done and approved with review and input of numerous members of
agency leadership. The agency would agree that this approval should have been better
documented.
23
The agency's decision to convert the previous RFP procurement approach to an IFB
approach is viewed as an acceptable action under the Illinois Procurement Code. This is
consistent with our belief that when a good or service being sought can be sufficiently
quantified to allow for a more objective and price-based decision through an IFB process,
that doing so is an appropriate action. We concur that in doing so, we must be vigilant
while replacing areas of subjective evaluation with mandatory requirements that do not
unduly limit opportunities to compete for responsible providers, while likewise taking
care to ensure that minimum requirements are effectively defined to ensure important
needs can be met.
24
11-5 FINDING: (Weaknesses in controls over payments to employees related to leave of
absence)
The Department did not timely ensure employees on leave of absence were properly
reported in the payroll system which resulted in overpayments to the employees.
We tested 60 employees that took a leave of absence during fiscal years 2010 and 2011
noting 5 (8%) employees were not included in the payroll system properly. The
employees were overpaid a total of $7,23 7 requiring the employees to subsequently
reimburse the State for compensation improperly received as follows:
• One employee returned from an interim assignment-leave of absence on July 25,
2009 but received compensation for the entire pay period resulting in an overpayment
for five workdays totaling $1 ,252. The overpayment was not reimbursed to the State
until September 30,2011.
• One employee started a service-connected disability leave of absence on March 29,
2010 but received compensation of $1 ,3 7 4 for the next pay period. The Department
did not identify the overpayment until June 15,2010 and the employee still owes the
State.
• One employee started a non-service disability leave of absence on August 26, 2009
but received compensation for the entire pay period resulting in an overpayment for
three workdays totaling $820. The Department did not identify the overpayment until
May 2010 at which time the employee reimbursed the State.
• One employee started a non-service disability leave of absence on January 14, 2011
but received compensation for the entire pay period resulting in an overpayment for
one workday totaling $315. The Department did not identify the overpayment until
September 2011 at which time the employee reimbursed the State.
• One employee started a non-service disability leave of absence on January 14, 2011
but received compensation of$3,476 for the next pay period. The Department did not
identify the overpayment until October 2011 and the employee still owes the State.
The Department's Personnel Transactions Manual, Section 7, states employees on
disability leave of absence are " ... not entitled to the normal pay and accrual of benefits
that are afforded to active employees."
. Department officials stated there can be potential transaction processing delays that affect
payroll when processing leave of absence changes.
25
Failure to promptly remove employees from the payroll records could result in
improperly spent State funds and could create a financial hardship to the employee if they
do not realize their compensation has not been computed properly. (Finding Code No.
11-5)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department improve controls over leave of absence reporting to
ensure employees are properly compensated in accordance with policy and recoup
overpayments which remain outstanding.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs with the overall recommendation and will review the system in
place to ensure that all paperwork affecting transactions is transmitted in a timely manner
to the A & R Shared Services Center for processing. The Department will also review
the Payroll process to ensure Payroll accurately recoups all monies owed to the State in a
timely manner.
Due to the nature of the leave and payroll processes, there will be instances where, due to
timing, leave changes cannot be corrected until subsequent payrolls are processed. The
Department believes it has compensating controls to identify and rectify these situations
in most cases, but will improve timeliness.
26
11·6 FINDING: (Failure to establish a prescription drug benefit program for school
districts)
The Department has not made available a prescription drug benefit program for school
districts as set forth in the School Employee Benefit Act.
The School Employee Benefit Act (Act) (1 05 ILCS 55/5 and 55/20) requires the
Department of Central Management Services to establish and administer a prescription
drug benefit program that will enable eligible school employees access to affordable
prescription drugs on a non-insured basis.
Department officials stated this program has not been funded by the General Assembly as
initiating the program would require seed money from the General Revenue Fund. The
Department has no resources to develop and market the program prior to collecting revenue
from participating school districts. Department officials further stated demand for this
program is lacking because school districts contracting for full health insurance programs
have limited ability to separate prescription drug coverage from an established health plan
contract.
Failure to establish a prescription dmg benefit program for school districts is in
noncompliance with the Act. (Finding Code No. 11-6)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department establish a prescription drug benefit prognL'll for school
districts as required by the School Employee Benefit Act or seek legislation to remove
the requirement.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs that the Prescription Drug benefit program for school districts
has not been established, due to lack of start-up funding and staffing. We will seek a
legislative amendment through the General Assembly session to make this program an
optional offering. Our group insurance programs are under great financial pressure and
payment delays, and this program cannot be offered unless fully self-supported through
revenues other than GRF.
27
11-7 FINDING: (Inadequate software licensing monitoring)
Although the consolidation was authorized in January 2005, the Department still did not
have an effective mechanism in place to track, control, and monitor end-user software
use.
20 ILCS 405/405-410, effective January 15, 2005, mandated the Department to
consolidate Information Technology functions of State government. Due to the
consolidation, eleven agencies' IT functions were consolidated into the Department. As a
result of the consolidation, the Department became responsible for tracking, controlling,
and monitoring software use and licenses.
The Department did not have an effective mechanism in place to track the number of
vendor software licenses purchased versus the number of software copies deployed. The
Department did have an automated inventory scanning tool; however, had not conducted
a comprehensive software license reconciliation (self-audit) ofthe number of software
licenses being utilized.
During the examination period, three vendors conducted audits of the number of software
licenses utilized as compared to the number of software licenses purchased. Two of the
vendor audits concluded the Department owed $179,728 for additional licenses already in
use.
20 ILCS 405/405-10 (4) states it shall be the duty of the Director and the policy of the State
oflllinois to "manage or delegate the management of the procurement, retention,
installation, maintenance and operation of all data processing equipment used by State
agencies ... "
Additionally, the Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act (30 ILCS 10/3001) requires all
State agencies to establish and maintain a system, or systems, of internal fiscal controls to
provide assurance funds, property, and other assets and resources are safeguarded against
waste, loss, unauthorized use and misappropriation.
Department officials stated that although they have processes in place to improve future
software purchase tracking, the review of the past purchases and license requirements is a
very time consuming effort. While a plan is in place to correct this, progress has been
hampered over the past few years by staff shortages and financial constraints, neither of
which is anticipated will be improving in the near future.
Failure to effectively track, control, and monitor end-user software use leaves the
Department exposed to the possibility of additional costs, including fees, penalties and
litigation. Routine monitoring would help ensure that software use and licenses are
reconciled. (Finding Code No. 11-7,09-8,08-10, 07-14)
RECOMMENDATION:
The Department should develop and implement an effective mechanism to routinely
track, control, and monitor end-user software use.
28
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs, and has implemented procedural steps to ensure license
compliance for all new software moves, additions and changes. A project is underway to
reconcile past purchases and license counts for software that was inherited from the
legacy agencies.
29
11-8 FINDING: (Failure to meetstatutory reporting requirements)
The Department failed to file reports as required by statute.
During our testing we noted reports required to be completed and submitted by the
Department have not been filed as follows:
• The Executive Reorganization Implementation Act (15 ILCS 15/11) requires "Every
agency created or assigned new functions pursuant to a reorganization shall report to
the General Assembly not later than 6 months after the reorganization takes effect
and annually thereafter for 3 years. This report shall include data on the economies
effected by the reorganization and an analysis of the effect of the reorganization on
State government. The report shall also include the agency's recommendations for
further legislation relating to reorganization." On April 1, 2009, the Governor signed
Executive Order 2009-7, "Executive Order to Reduce Energy Consumption in State
Facilities." This Order abolished the Interagency Energy Conservation Committee
and made the Department responsible for implementing a program to increase energy
efficiency, track and reduce energy usage and improve the procurement of energy for
all State-owned and State-leased facilities for all agencies. To date no reports have
been filed regarding this reorganization. Department officials stated they were
unaware of the reporting requirement and have since compiled and filed the report on
March 28,2012 with the General Assembly.
• The Identity Protection Act (5 ILCS 179/37(b)) states "Each agency must provide a
copy of its identity-protection policy to the Social Security Number Protection Task
Force within 30 days after the approval of the policy." The Department approved its
identity-protection policy on May 31, 2011 but the policy has not been submitted to
the Social Security Number Protection Task Force as required. Department officials
stated this was caused by an oversight during staffing turnover.
• The Civil Administrative Code of Illinois (20 ILCS 405/405-20(b)) states "the
Department under the Director shall formulate a master plan for statistical research,
utilizing electronic equipment most advantageously, and advising whether electronic
data processing equipment should be leased or purchased by the State. The
Department under the Director shall prepare and submit interim reports of
meaningful developments and proposals for legislation to the Governor on or before
January 30 of each year." The Department has not submitted the reports to the
Governor as required. Department officials stated the Agency had developed a draft
report in FY11; however, it was not finalized until after the January 30th submission
deadline. The report was submitted to the new State CIO on February 4th, 2011.
Failure to submit required reports is a violation of State statute and hinders the State's
ability to 1) monitor the effects of reorganization on State government, 2) consider future
legislation relating to reorganization or use of electronic data processing equipment that
may be warranted, or 3) evaluate the effectiveness of the Department's identity­protection
policy. (Finding Code No. 11-8, 09-12, 08-14)
30
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department comply with the State statutes and submit all required
~·eports on a timely basis or seek legislative remedy to have the statutory requirement
removed.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs with the recommendations. The Department has developed a
strategic initiatives document and submitted it to the Governor's Office. We will make
every effort to update this document and submit it within the required time frames. With
regard to the Identity Protection Act, the policy was submitted on December 21, 2011.
Additionally, CMS's Bureau of Legal Services has created a comprehensive spreadsheet
centrally indicating all reporting requirements and deadlines. We are also in the process
of implementing a "tickler" system that will be "owned" by Legal. This electronic system
·will obviate the inefficiency caused by multiple individuals manually tracking their
bureaus' statutory reporting responsibilities.
31
11-9 FINDING: (Noncompliance with the Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act)
The Department did not comply with the Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act
(FCIAA) that requires audits of major systems of internal accounting and administrative
control.
The Institute of Internal Auditors' International Standards for the Professional Practice of
Internal Auditing (IIA Standards) require the Department to develop risk-based plans to
determine the priorities of the internal audit activities while the Fiscal Control and
Internal Auditing Act (Act) (30 ILCS 10/2003) establishes specific mandates regarding
internal audit requirements at Illinois State agencies.
The Act requires the internal auditing program to include audits of major systems of
internal accounting and administrative control be conducted on a periodic basis so that all
major systems are reviewed at least once every two years. The Department could not
demonstrate that audits of major systems were being completed once every two years as
required by the Act and certain risk assessment processes lacked sufficient
documentation as follows:
• The fiscal year 2011 internal audit plan identified 11 high risk audits to be performed.
The Department has not completed or issued any of these 11 audits through the date
of this report. Department officials stated documentation was not properly updated
and maintained, identifying changes in audits to be completed, based on an additional
risk assessment performed at the time changes were made.
• Subsequent to June 30, 2011, the Department issued reports for audits substantially
completed during fiscal year 2011 that were not included in the internal audit plan.
Department officials stated these audits were conducted during the fiscal year as a
result of changes in the assessment of risk. There were no formal transmittal letters
issued to document/substantiate the reports were officially issued.
• The Department could not demonstrate they were effectively assessing risks
assoCiated with the eleven major transaction cycles identified in the Statewide
Accounting Management System (SAMS) Manual (Procedure 02.50.20). The risk
assessment was general in nature rather than specific to the major transaction cycles.
• The Department could not demonstrate reviews of the design of m~jor new electronic
data processing systems or major modifications to existing systems were being
performed to ensure the systems provide adequate audit trails and accountability.
Discussion of priority projects being administered by the Bureau of Communications
and Computer Services was conducted in bi-weekly meetings; however, no
documentation was maintained to support a decision to conduct or not conduct an
audit.
In addition, the Act requires annual reports to be submitted to the chief executive officer
by September 30 for the prior fiscal year. The annual report for fiscal year 2011 which
would have been due September 30, 2011, was not submitted.
32
Department officials stated the Internal Audit unit was responsible for carrying out many
ofthe tasks associated with the dissolution ofthe Illinois Office of Internal Audit and the
staffing plan provided for ten internal auditors while only three positions were filled for
most of the fiscal year. The lack of documentation was an oversight due to the additional
responsibilities. The changes in audit plan and identified areas of risks were
communicated to the Director verbally as changes were made and were identified
formally in the FY 11 Annual Report filed with the Director's Office March 7, 2012.
The inability to ensure the internal audit effort provides coverage of all major internal
control systems increases the risk that significant internal control weaknesses may exist
and errors and irregularities may go undetected. (Finding Code No. 11-9, 09-19, 08-23,
07-26, 06-16)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department ensure audits of all major systems of internal accounting
and administrative control are conducted at least once every two years and that annual
reports are submitted to the chief executive office by September 30 of each fiscal year as
required by the Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act. We further recommend the
Department improve documentation of the risk assessment process to more clearly
associate the internal audit effort with identified/assessed risks.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs with the recommendation.
To address the recommendation Internal Audit (IA) plans to take corrective action by
implementing the following processes by end of fiscal year 2012. To address
documentation of changes to the annual audit plan, IA will complete Audit Change
Forms to identify audits on the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012/2013 audit plan that were not
performed and the reasoning for not performing the audits. These change forms will
identify whether the audit was postponed until the next fiscal year or whether it was
canceled from the plan. In addition, a change form will be completed to identify any new
audits performed during the fiscal year that were not on the approved FY 12/13 Audit
Plan. In addition, IA will further address the recommendation by sending transmittal
.letters for all audit reports issued and will maintain a log of email correspondence
supporting and identifying the date of issuance. To address documentation of risk
assessment process, IA will implement a risk assessment process which involves sending
questionnaires to Bureau management and assessing areas of risks. The risk assessment
will be utilized to create the FY 13114 Audit Plan for the Director to approve prior to July
1, 2012. The audit plan will also identify FCIAA coverage areas to ensure audits of all
major systems of internal accounting and administrative control are conducted at least
once every two years. In addition, IA will obtain a listing ofBCCS system
implementations or modifications performed during FY12 and document the materiality
determination to audit/or not. Going forward IA will develop a process for documenting
the system materiality for determination of major system reviews on an on-going basis
throughout the fiscal year.
33
In addition, lA will prepare a written annual report for FY 12, as required by FCIAA, and
submit to the Director by September 30, 2012.
All of these procedures will be updated and documented in the Internal Audit's Policy
and Procedure Manual to be followed and carried out going forward. ·
34
11-10 FINDING: (Documentation of Chief Internal Auditor experience and training not
sufficient)
The Department did not sufficiently document the Chief Internal Auditor possessed the
requisite background and experience required by the Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing
Act nor could the Department document the Chief Internal Auditor was maintaining
appropriate continuing education.
The Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act (FCIAA) (30 ILCS 1 0/2002) requires the
chief executive officer of each designated State agency to appoint a chief internal auditor
with a bachelor's degree, who is either: (1) a certified internal auditor by examination or
a certified public accountant and who has at least 4 years of progressively responsible
professional auditing experience; or (2) an auditor with at least 5 years of progressively
responsible professional auditing experience. The employee completed
Examining/Employment Application (CMS 1 00) forms noting prior experience in internal
audit; however, the Department did not provide adequate supporting documentation
demonstrating verification of five years of progressively responsible professional
auditing experience as set forth in FCIAA. Department officials stated upon review of
the CMS-1 00, the Department completed a checklist. The leadership of the Department
also knew firsthand the qualifications were met through prior direct work experience with
the candidate and knowledge of his background before joining the State. The Department
further stated the statute does not identify documentation required to be maintained and
the Department felt the due diligence performed at the time was sufficient for confirming
the candidate's experience.
In addition, documentation of the Chief Internal Auditor's compliance with the
continuing professional education (CPE) requirements established by the State of Illinois
Internal Audit Advisory Board bylaws (Article II- Section 5.1) and Department policy
was insufficient. Summary listings of courses were maintained, but the Department did
not provide documentation, such as certificates of attendance, supporting proper
completion of courses for which credit was claimed. The bylaws and the Department's
Internal Audit Policy and Procedures Manual require internal audit staff, including the
chief internal auditor, to obtain 80 hours ofCPE every two years with at least 24 ofthose
hours in subjects related to government. Department officials stated the Division of
Internal Audit has been in existence only since July 1, 2010 (when the Illinois Office of
Internal Audit was de-consolidated) and there is not a two-year period to evaluate.
Department officials stated the records were not maintained and tracked centrally (upon
deconsolidation of the Office of Internal audit) and the lack of documentation was an
oversight due to the additional responsibilities associated with the dissolution of the
Illinois Office of Internal Audit.
Failure to adequately document the necessary experience ofthe chief internal auditor
represents noncompliance with the Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act. Combined
with the lack of documentation of appropriate continuing professional education, these
deficiencies could result in the chief internal auditor lacking the necessary experience for
the position and insufficient training to maintain professional competencies. (Finding
Code No. 11-10)
35
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department ensure adequate documentation is maintained to
demonstrate the chief internal auditor possesses the required background and experience
for the position and all required continuing education standards are met.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department agrees with the recommendation.
The Department required the completion of a CMS-1 00 application prior to hiring the
Chief Internal Auditor. In addition, the Department reviewed the application and found it
consistent with firsthand knowledge of the candidate through prior direct work
experience and knowledge of his background before joining the State. The Department
completed a checklist, identifying the requirements met: bachelor's degree and 5 plus
years auditing experience. The Department is confident the Chief Internal Auditor met
the qualifications for required auditing experience as required per FCIAA. The
Department agrees additional documentation could have been maintained to detail the
experience in which the applicant had to meet the position requirement.
The Department will remind all internal auditors of the importance to maintain CPE
certificates to support the training received. In addition, Internal Audit will maintain a
centralized database to track CPE hours for all auditors going forward, upon receipt of
certification of completion.
36
11-11 FINDING: (Follow up to management audit of the Depru1ment's Administration of
the Business Enterprise Program)
In June 2006, the Office of the Auditor General released a management audit of the
Department of Central Management Services' Administration of the Business Enterprise
Program. The audit contained fifteen recommendations to improve the perfonnance and
operation of the Department to effectively manage the State's policies in place over the
program. As part of this compliance examination (for the two years ended June 30,
2011), auditors determined that the Department has implemented two of the five
recommendations not fully implemented during previous years and partially implemented
two of the five recommendations not fully implemented during the previous years. One of
the recommendations has not been implemented.
The following recommendation has not been implemented by the Department:
• Ensure all certifications are completed within 60 days (Recommendation #7):
The Department of Central Management Services should ensure that all applicants
for certification or recertification are processed in the required 60 days. While
management has developed policies and procedures requiring that applications for
certifications be processed within 60 days, this timeframe has not been met. Out of a
sample of 25 certifications selected for testing, ten certifications were not processed
within the 60 day processing criteria. In addition, we noted four instances where
tracking data contained in the Department's Certification Log did not agree with the
documentation supporting the certification.
Department officials stated the continual underlying cause for this finding lies
specifically with resources. During FY2011, the BEP Bureau processed 1,895
certification applications. In FY2010, the BEP Bureau processed 1,673 applications.
In both fiscal years, the number of analysts budgeted to review all certification
applications have remained at 4. The number of ratio of assigned staff indicates an
average of approximately 450 applications being assigned to each analyst on an
annual basis. In many instances, vendors require repeated assistance in acquiring
accurate documentation for finalization of files. In addition, tracking mechanisms
were not utilized to fullest extent alerting management well in advance of potential
delays and staff were not effectively utilized to maximize reviewing strengths for
difficult levels of varying certification applications.
37
The following two recommendations have been partially implemented by the
Department:
• Develop minimum training requirements and track training (Recommendation
#3): CMS should establish minimum training requirements for certification staff and
ensure that the required training is received. CMS should also track the training
received by certification staff Management has identified training it would like staff
to attend and has set minimum training requirements for staff, including a monthly
training requirement. However, staff did not receive the minimum training outlined
in the BEP Policy and Procedure Manual. In the prior examination the Department
provided evidence of four training classes held, however, no training classes were
offered or attended by staff during fiscal years 201 0 or 2011.
Department officials stated that due to budget constraints there were no policies,
procedures, or plan developed or put in place for required training of employees in
fiscal years 2010 or 2011.
• Consider conducting site visits (Recommendation #6): The Department of Central
Management Services should consider conducting site visits of all applicants.
Management has defined a procedure that describes, in general terms, the
circumstances under which a certification may require a site visit. Certification may
be flagged for site visits as a result of questionable elements in the application as
determined by the analyst, Operations Manager or Deputy Director. In addition, a
third party complaint may warrant a site visit. Under this approach, the Department
has represented that 41 certifications were flagged for a site visit during fiscal year
2010 and 26 certifications were flagged for a site visit during fiscal year 2011.
Records provided by program management indicate that all 67 flagged files resulted
in actual site visits during the fiscal years.
While the Department has implemented a procedure to define the site visit process, it
has not identified and documented uniform criteria for all analysts and management
to use in determining when a certification includes questionable content that should
warrant a site visit. Under the current procedure, similar circumstances could be
interpreted differently by different analysts due to a lack of documented, uniform
guidance.
In addition, the Department has not documented consideration of alternatives to
performing site visits of all applicants, such as a cyclical methodology to cover a
reasonable percentage of new applications and renewals each year. Such a
methodology could improve controls over the certification process and help to further
ensure that only entities that are truly eligible under the requirements of the program
receive benefits.
38
Department officials stated the continual underlying cause for this .finding lies
specifically with resources. Department officials also stated the option of utilizing
temporary services to offset budgeted staff has been explored and implemented
however, union agreements covering existing analyst employees, have limited
temporary use to only filing, answering of phones and document retrieval assistance.
The following two recommendations have been implemented by the Department:
• Adequate Membership and regularly scheduled council meetings
(Recommendation #1): The Department of Central Management Services should
ensure that the Business Enterprise Council has adequate membership and that the
meetings are held on a regular basis. During fiscal years 2010 and 2011 the Council
held meetings on a regular basis and all vacancies on the Council were filled.
• Reciprocal Agreements with Agencies and Universities (Recommendation #4):
CMS should develop written agreements with those entities that it accepts
certifications from to ensure that those entities' requirements and procedures equal
or exceed those in The Business Enterprise for Minorities, Females, and Persons with
Disabilities Act and to ensure that vendors are eligible. Agreements should include
requirements, procedures, and notifications of certification or denial or changes in
requirements. The Business Enterprise Council should also approve all agreements.
Management has developed a standard reciprocity agreement for the Agencies and
Universities and had previously finalized the agreement with seven of the eight
entities. During the current period, the reciprocity agreement with the City of
Chicago was finalized.
It is important that the Department continue to implement the recommendations from the
management audit to further improve its operations and performance. (Finding Code No.
11-11,09-9,08-11, 07-22)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department of Central Management Services continue to fully
implement the remaining three management audit recommendations contained in the June
2006 Business Enterprise Management Audit that were either not implemented or were
partially implemented.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs with the recommendations and will continue to work toward
ensuring that all certification/recertification are processed within the required sixty days.
To facilitate this goal, the Department is streamlining its cenification processes with both
staff assignments, improved tracking reporting, and adding full and or temporary staffing.
Regarding training for certification staff, Department will continue to work with upper
management to gamer approval for the out of state certification training program needed
for this certification.
39
The Department will continue to utilize all the resources available to it in fulfilling the
Site Visit recommendation. The Department has restructured its programmatic
procedures in order to have all personnel conduct minimum of 4 site visit goals monthly
on files that they assigned. Site visits will be conducted on firms reflecting potential
ineligibility factors pertaining to control, ownership, and management documentation. In
instances where long distance travel on firms is presented, we will work with sister
agencies for assistance in conducting such site visits. We will also consider utilizing other
agencies' site visit previously completed upon release of the report by firm. The
Department will continue to consider possible alternatives to performing site visits of all
applicants.
40
11-·12 FINDING: (Surplus property management process weaknesses)
The Department's Division of Property Management State Surplus Warehouse has not
fully implemented an adequate inventory control system.
The Department is currently in the process of implementing a new inventory management
tracking system to assist in reallocating surplus property to agencies in need; however,
the prior paper inventory tracking system is still partially in use. Under the old system, a
paper listing of surplus property submitted by agencies with the delivery of items to the
warehouse was the only record of surplus inventory. The lack of an adequate inventory
control system impedes compliance with the Illinois Administrative Code ( 44 Ill. Adm.
Code Part 5010), and reduces the ability of Surplus Warehouse personnel and agencies to
locate equipment for potential transfer. This results in a risk that agencies would
purchase new equipment when comparable equipment could have been obtained from the
Surplus Warehouse.
One method of the disposal of equipment under the Illinois Administrative Code ( 44 Ill.
Adm. Code 5010.61 0) is to offer the equipment for the use of any State agency. The lack
of an adequate inventory control system has hindered the ability of the Surplus
Warehouse to offer equipment to State agencies. Under the old system, a comprehensive
list of available items is not maintained or disseminated to agencies. However, agencies
are permitted to send "want lists" and be notified of requested transferable equipment as
it became available (44 Ill. Adm. Code 5010.640).
Department personnel stated a new inventory control system is currently being
implemented and the Department estimates approximately 90% of the surplus electronic
property and 50% of all other surplus property and equipment has been converted to the
new system. In its response to the prior finding, the Department stated the new system
had been designed and was in the testing phase, with an anticipated fully functioning roll-
. out target of May 2010. ·
The lack of effective controls regarding the receipt and inventory of equipment increases
the potential for theft of the State's surplus property. (Finding Code No. 11-12, 09-10,
08-12~07-23,06-9,05-16,04-15)
. RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department complete the implementation of the centralized inventory
system software. An effective inventory control system would improve controls over the
receipt and tracking of inventory, reduce the potential for theft, and enable the Surplus
Warehouse to better serve the needs of State agencies.
41
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs, and notes that it implemented a web-based inventory
management system in August 2011. Today, 100% of all items transferred to CMS State
Surplus by state agencies, boards, commissions, universities, and constitutional offices
are electronically received through the system. The system now requires user agencies to
enter surplus property into a web-based system. To begin, an electronic transfer
document is created by the user agency. Equipment is scheduled for transportation and
received at the warehouse; items are inspected and a new surplus inventory barcode is
applied. Items are received and compared against a physical inventory and discrepancies
are noted and notice is issued to the owning user agency denoting discrepancies. In
addition, when surplus property is acquired and transferred to a state agency, an
electronic email notice is also issued to the agency's Property Officer denoting the item
issued to their agency. Finally, every Property Officer of every State Agency has access
to the system and can run a report at any time to see every item received in the current
cycle and on the warehouse floor. Electronics go straight to two State Use recycling
vendors and the system denotes that information.
42
11·-13 FINDING: (Not timely in filing contracts with the Comptroller)
The Department was not timely in filing contracts in excess of $10,000 with the
Comptroller.
During the current period, 25 contracts and leases awarded totaling a maximum award
amount of approximately $400 million were selected for testing.
In 5 of 25 (20%) contracts and leases totaling $20 million, the Department did not file the
contract with the Comptroller within 15 days of the execution date of the contract, as
required by the Illinois Procurement Code. Three of25 (12%) contracts and leases were
filed with the Office of the Comptroller greater than 30 days after the execution date,
thereby requiring a late filing affidavit. One of the three contracts and leases did not have
the required late filing affidavit on file with the Comptroller.
The Illinois Procurement Code (30 ILCS 500/20-80 (b)) requires any State agency that
incurs a contract liability exceeding $10,000 to file a copy of the contract or lease with
the Office of the Comptroller within 15 days of the contract's execution. If the contract
is not filed with the Comptroller within 30 days of execution, the Illinois Procurement
Code (30 ILCS 500/20-80(c)) requires the State agency to submit an affidavit to the
Office of the Comptroller and the Office of the Auditor General explaining the reason
why the contract or lease was not filed.
Department officials stated that it is not possible in some cases to file contracts within 15
days of execution because there are frequent issues with filing documentation including
FEIN mismatches, proper W9s on file at the IOC, etc., which require back and forth contact
with vendors after contract execution. In addition, two of the exceptions were held due to
the Comptroller's implementation of new master contract system edits in SAMS.
Failure to file contracts and leases in excess of$1 0,000 in a timely fashion with the
Office of the Comptroller is a violation of State statute. (Finding Code No. 11-13,09-11,
08-13, 07-19, 06-6)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department take the necessary steps to ensure contracts and leases
are filed with the State Comptroller within 15 days ~fter the execution of the agreement.
·we also recommend late filing affidavits be completed and submitted for those contracts
and leases that are not filed with the Office of the Comptroller within 30 days of contract
execution.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs. The majority of exceptions noted were in the 15 day window.
The IOC does not recognize contracts as being late until30 days. There is pending
legislation to clarify and eliminate the 15 day requirement. In terms of the 30 day filing
. requirement, we continue to train fiscal and procurement staff on the importance of timely
filing.
43
The Department believes it is in compliance with the affidavit requirement. The only
·contract that did not have the required affidavit was a contract held by the IOC due to their
implementing a new system. The IOC determines, by accepting or rejecting the contract,
whether it requires an affidavit. It is our belief that this contract was determined by the IOC
to have been received in a timely manner since the IOC did not require an affidavit.
44
11-14 FINDING: (Failure to develop rules or policies describing the State employees' group
insurance program)
The Department has not developed rules or policies describing the State employees'
group insurance program as requested by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules
(JCAR).
The Illinois Administrative Procedure Act (5 ILCS 100) requires that any State agency
policy affecting anyone outside that agency be expressed through rules adopted under the
Act. Further, the State Employees Group Insurance Act of 1971 ( 5 ILCS 3 7 5/15) states,
"The Director shall ... prescribe such rules and regulations as are necessary to give full
effect to the purposes of this Act."
JCAR indicated in a letter dated May 11, 2006 to the Department that JCAR has had
informal discussions with the Department over at least the three years prior to the date of
the letter, and the Department acknowledged a lack of rules for the program.
Furthermore, the Department has indicated to JCAR on more than one occasion that rules
for this program were being drafted and that a submission of them would be forthcoming.
The Department has not completed or submitted those rules to JCAR for their
consideration nor is there a target date for the submission of these rules.
Department officials stated rules have not been codified for the State Employees' Group
Insurance Act since implementation in 1971. In lieu of formal rules, statutory, policy and
plan design guidelines are communicated yearly through annual benefit choice training and
materials, handbooks and certificates of insurance coverage. According to the Department,
the lack of rules has not hindered administration of the program, and due to competing
priorities rules have not been formalized. Department officials further stated, rules have not
been necessary to give full effect to the purposes of the Act.
The Department is in noncompliance with the Acts. Failure to develop rules or policies
describing the State employees' group insurance program increases the likelihood that
other State agencies will be in noncompliance with the program. (Finding Code No. 11-
14, 09-15, 08-17, 07-28, 06-18)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department develop the necessary rules affecting the State
employees' group insurance program in accordance with the Illinois Administrative
Procedure Act.
45
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs. The Department has rules established for 5 of the 6 programs
under the Group Insurance Act, and the Bureau of Benefits had been drafting rules for the
State Employees Group Health Program. Due to the changing guidelines for the
program, particularly those associated with pending federal legislation, union agreements
and the expansion of coverage under Public Act 095-0958, the Bureau delayed finalizing
and submitting these rules until these important program changes can be incorporated.
Executive Order 12-01 was filed 3/1112 to recombine healthcare purchasing into CMS
from DHFS. The Rules outline responsibilities between the two agency directors, and we
would like final resolution regarding agency authority to finalize the rules for JCAR. The
General Assembly has 60 days to act on the Executive Order.
46
11-15 FINDING: (Inadequate monitoring of interagency agreements)
The Department's process to monitor interagency agreements was inadequate.
During our examination we tested 25 interagency agreements between the Department
·and other State agencies and noted 10 of25 (40%) were not signed by all necessary parties
before the effective date. These agreements were between 1 and 221 days late.
The Comptroller's Statewide Accounting Management System Manual (Procedure
15.20.30) states contracts must be executed prior to commencement of services.
Interagency agreements are binding contracts between State agencies. Further, prudent
business practices require the approval of agreements prior to the effective date.
Department officials stated the causes for late execution vary, depending upon the
situation. In most cases, an urgent operational matter generally arises requiring that
immediate action be taken. In these circumstances, though the agency heads reach mutual
agreement in principle, circumstances may not permit that agreement to be reduced to
writing before it is implemented. Once CMS-Legal becomes aware of the need for an
IGA, we work diligently to draft and circulate it for signature as accurately and quickly as
possible. Unfortunately, we are unable to dictate the speed at which other agencies return
the signed IGA to us for recordkeeping. With regard to recurring agreements, we have
more control over the timing of the IGAs.
The Department has entered into 167 agreements with other State agencies and other
units of government during the examination period. The purpose of the agreements is to
assist the Department in fulfilling its mandated mission. In order to assess whether the
agreement is reasonable, appropriate, and sufficiently documents the responsibilities of
the appropriate parties, the agreement needs to be approved prior to the effective date and
executed before the commencement of services. (Finding Code No. 11-15,09-16,08-18,
07-27, 06-17)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department ensure all interagency agreements are approved by an
authorized signer prior to the effective date of the agreement and executed prior to the
commencement of services.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs, though we assert that many, if not most, intergovernmental
agreements (IGAs) are not, due to their subject matter, subject to the Comptroller's
Procedure 15.20.30. Nonetheless, the Department agrees that best practice is to have a
written IGA in place before an oral agreement is acted upon.
47
The Department has implemented a tracking system which will e~sure earlier routing of
draft agreements, and which should result in more timely return of executed documents
from other agencies. We are in the process of developing a written protocol for drafting,
routing and maintaining records ofiGAs.
48
11-16 FINDING: (Avoidable use of emergency contracts)
The Department filed emergency purchase affidavits for purchases which were not
emergencies, in violation of the Illinois Procurement Code.
During our testing of emergency purchase affidavits, we noted nine affidavits over the
course of two years filed to extend telecommunications network services for the State.
Two of the affidavits were for a twelve month period from December 16, 2009 to
December 15, 2010. Three affidavits were submitted for three-month extensions to
March 15, 2011 followed by four affidavits submitted for three-month extensions to June
15, 2011. The total estimated expenditures for the extension period were approximately
$53 million. The original contract, including allowable renewal periods, expired on
September 30,2008. The Illinois Administrative Code (44 Ill. Adm. Code 1.2005(1))
allows for the extension of an indefinite quantity contract for a period of 90 days. The
network services contract was extended beyond September 30,2008 date for 90 days
with a new contract end date of December 14, 2008. Additional extensions have since
been procured through the emergency purchase method to allow for continued services
while a request for proposal was conducted to establish a replacement contract.
In the prior engagement we also noted cellular services were procured as emergency
purchases. The Department continued to extend the contracts through June 30,2010 as
emergency purchases; however, contracts for cellular services were procured for fiscal
year 2011 without use of emergency purchase filings.
The Illinois Procurement Code (Code) (30 ILCS 500/20-30) states that a purchasing
agency may make emergency procurements without competitive sealed bidding or prior
notice when there exists a threat to public health or public safety, or when immediate
expenditure is necessary for repairs to State property in order to protect against further
loss of or damage to State property, to prevent or minimize serious disruption in State
services, or to ensure the integrity of State records. The Code also states that the
emergency procurements shall be made with as much competition as possible. Further,
the Code states that the Department shall employ such competition as is practicable under
the emergency circumstances to abate the emergency situation.
Department officials stated the review, approval and re-issuing of the competitive
procurement for replacement contract(s) for telecommunications network services
required the Department to procure an additional twelve month extension through the
emergency purchase method to avoid a lapse in mission critical communications services.
49
The Department's inability to procure a master contract for telecommunication network
services has created the emergency situation. Proper planning and foresight would have
allowed for these services to be competitively bid on a timely, non-emergency basis. As
a result, the Department circumvented the bidding process mandated by the Illinois
Procurement Code and spent $46,756,096 for telecommunications network services from
December 15, 2008 to June 15, 2011. In addition, another emergency purchase contract
is in place to extend the services beyond June 15, 2011. These services should not have
been an emergency and should have been competitively procured. (Finding Code No.
11-16,09-18,08-21)
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend the Department follow the Illinois Prqcurement Code and use the
emergency provisions of the Illinois Procurement Code only in true emergencies and not
due to inadequate planning.
DEPARTMENT RESPONSE:
The Department concurs. The contracts in question have been competitively awarded and
signed. The Department has taken steps to minimize the use of emergency contract
extensions by proactively managing complex procurements earlier in the procurement
cycle. In addition, the Executive Ethics Commission now has an oversight and approval
role regarding proper use of emergency contracts.
50
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
PRIOR FINDINGS NOT REPEATED
A FINDING: (Excess retained earnings balances representing noncompliance with
federal regulations)
!n the prior examination, the Department generated excess retained earnings balances
for the Communications Revolving Fund and failed to make adequate adjustments as
required by OMB Circular A-87.
During the current examination, it was determined that the finding will only be
addressed in the Statewide Single Audit and was excluded from the compliance
attestation engagement. (Finding Code No. 09-2, 08-1, 07-1, 06-1)
B FINDING: (Reporting of costs not in accordance with federal regulations)
In the prior examination, the Department recognized costs for federal reporting
purposes different than reported in the Department's financial statements prepared in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and unallowable
costs were reported for federal purposes. The Department's financial statements were
reported correctly; however, federal reporting was incorrect.
During the current examination, it was determined that the finding will only be
addressed in the Statewide Single Audit and was excluded from the compliance
attestation engagement. (Finding Code No. 09-3, 08-2, 07-2)
C FINDING: (Incomplete and inaccurate records over computer systems and
equipment)
In the prior examination, the Department did not maintain complete, accurate, or
detailed records to substantiate its current midrange computer system and equipment.
During the current examination, we noted the Department embarked on a project to
implement a new database in order to track the midrange equipment and installed a
software tool which documented the operating systems, patch levels, and antivirus
software. We reviewed the database and the software tool reports to determine the
accuracy information within the database and found significant improvements from
the prior year. Although we noted discrepancies within the database, these
discrepancies were not significant enough to dassify as a material weakness.
(Finding Code No. 10-3,09-5,08-8, 07-12)
51
D FINDING: (Inadequate disaster contingency planning)
In the prior examination, the Department did not have an adequately developed and
tested disaster contingency plan for the midrange environment.
During the current examination, we noted the Department made progress in disaster
contingency planning. However, the Department had not finalized and approved the
Disaster Recovery - Midrange Applications document or performed detailed recovery
testing of the midrange environment. As a result of the improvements the Department
has made, this finding has been moved to an immaterial finding. (Finding Code No. 09-
7,08-9, 07-13)
E FINDING: (Time sheets not maintained in compliance with the State Officials and
Employees Ethics Act)
In the prior examination, the Department did not maintain time sheets for its employees
in compliance with the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act.
During the current examination, we noted the Department developed policies and
procedures for reporting hours worked on official State business and instituted the
requirement of all of its employees to submit timesheets in accordance with the Act.
(Finding Code No. 09-14,08-16,07-25,06-14,05-21, 04-23)
F FINDING.: (Leases in holdover status)
In the prior examination, the Department was not actively managing its leased space or
occupancy, nor bidding and renewing, or consolidating its existing leases resulting in a
substantial number of leases that were not timely renewed or terminated.
During the current examination, we noted the Department did not have any leases in
holdover status as of June 30,2010 and June 30,2011. (Finding Code No. 09-17)
G FINDING: (Late approval and payment of vouchers)
In the prior examination, the Department did not process invoice vouchers in a timely
manner as required by the Illinois Administrative Code.
During the current examination it was noted that the majority of the Department's
funds are cash managed. Vouchers are submitted to the Comptroller when there are
sufficient cash funds to cover the payment of vouchers which may be after payment
timeframe required by the Illinois Administrative Code. (Finding Code No. 09-13, 08-
15, 01-24,06-13, 05-20, 04-21)
52
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
MANAGEMENT AUDIT FOLLOW-UP
For the Two Years Ended June 30, 2011
2008 JOINT PROCUREMENTS OF BULK ROCK SALT
The Illinois Office of the Auditor General conducted a management audit of the Illinois
Department of Central Management Services' 2008 Joint Procurements of Bulk Rock Salt
pursuant to Legislative Audit Commission Resolution Number 138. The audit was released in
June 2009 and contained eight recommendations to the Illinois Department of Central
Management Services (Department). As part of the Fiscal Year 2009 Compliance Examination,
we noted that seven of the eight recommendations were fully implemented and one of the eight
recommendations was partially implemented. As part of the Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011
Compliance Examination of the Illinois Department of Central Management Services, we
followed up on the status of the remaining recommendation that was not fully implemented
contained in the audit.
Recommendation #6 - Data Analysis and Cost Savings
The Department should compile appropriate electronic data sufficient to conduct analysis of
bids and work with local communities to make the most cost effective decisions in jointly
procuring bulk rock salt.
Status - Partially Implemented
There has been no progress made by the Department on the recommendation since the prior
compliance examination. Although the Department collects bid data in an electronic format, the
mainframe Illinois Governmental Purchasing System (IGPS) continues to be utilized as its
primary procurement tool. According to Department officials, no funds have, as of yet, been
identified for a system upgrade. Department officials agree that while the IGPS meets basic
needs, it does not offer the full flexibility suggested within this recommendation. The
Department also agrees that this would be desirable for complex bid activities represented in any
solicitation of a similar magnitude as the solicitation for road salt.
53
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FOR STATE COMPLIANCE PURPOSES
SUMMARY
Supplementary Information for State Compliance Purposes presented in this section of the report
includes the following:
• Fiscal Schedules and Analysis:
Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards
Notes to the Schedule of Expenditures ofFederal Awards
Schedule of Appropriations, Expenditures and Lapsed Balances
Comparative Schedule ofNet Appropriations, Expenditures and Lapsed Balances
Schedule of Changes in State Property
Comparative Schedule of Cash Receipts and Reconciliation of Cash Receipts to Deposits
Remitted to the Comptroller
Analysis of Significant Variations in Expenditures
Analysis of Significant Variations in Receipts
Analysis of Significant Lapse Period Spending
Analysis of Accounts Receivable
• Analysis of Operations:
Agency Functions and Planning Program
Average Number of Employees
Emergency Purchases
Debt Collection Board
Service Efforts and Accomplishments (Unaudited)
The accountant's report that covers the Supplementary Information for State Compliance
Purposes presented in the Compliance Report Section states that it has been subjected to the
auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, in the auditors'
opinion, except for that portion marked "unaudited," on which they express no opinion, it is
fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.
54
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS
For the Year Ended June 30, 2011
(expressed in thousands)
Federal
CFDA Federal
Federal Grantor/Program Title Number Expenditures
U.S. Department of Commerce
ARRA - Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP)
Total U.S. Department of Commerce
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Passed through the Illinois Emergency Management Agency
Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP)
Total U.S. Department ofHomeland Security
Total Expenditures of Federal Awards
11.557 $
97.078
$
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this schedule.
55
2,678
2,678
154
154
2,832
Schedule 1
Amount
Provided To
Subrecipients
$ 586
586
$ 586
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
NOTES TO THE SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS
Year Ended June 30,2011
1. GENERAL
The Department of Central Management Services (the Department) is a part ofthe executive
branch of government of the State of Illinois (State) and operates under the authority and
review by the Illinois General Assembly. The Department operates under a budget approved
by the General Assembly in which resources are appropriated for the use of the Department.
Activities of the Department are subject to the authority of the Office of the Governor, the
State's chief executive officer, and other departments ofthe executive and legislative
branches of government (such as the Governor's Office of Management and Budget, the
State Treasurer's Office, and the State Comptroller's Office) as defined by the General
Assembly.
The Depaijment provides a variety of centralized services for the operation of State
Government. The Department provides personnel services for State agencies; purchases
goods and services for State agencies; supplies telecommunications, data processing,
videoconferencing, and office automation; manages state property, and disseminates
information about State Government to the news media and general public. It employs
volume purchasing and economies of scale to reduce costs and improve government
efficiency. The Department also promotes the economic development of minority and
female businesses and rehabilitation facilities for persons with disabilities.
The schedule includes the expenditures of federal awards received directly from federal
agencies or passed through other State agencies.
These schedules were prepared for State compliance purposes only. A separate single audit
of the Department was not conducted. However, a separate single audit ofthe entire State of
Illinois (which includes the Department) was performed and released under separate cover.
2. BASIS OF ACCOUNTING
The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures ofFederal Awards (Schedule) of the State of
Illinois, Department of Central Management Services for the year ended June 30, 2011 is
presented on a cash basis of accounting for expenditures. Such basis differs from the
modified accrual basis of accounting because it does not include costs incurred prior to the
end of the year, but not paid, and includes costs paid during the current year but reported in
. the prior year.
56
ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
NOTES TO THE SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL A WARDS- Continued
3. DESCRIPTION OF GRANT PROGRAMS
The following is a brief description of the programs included in the Schedule of Expenditures
ofFederal Awards:
A. U.S. Department of Commerce
ARRA- Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP)- CFDA No.ll.557-
This program accelerates broadband deployment in unserved and underserved areas and
ensures that strategic institutions which are likely to create jobs or provide significant
public benefits have broadband connections.
B. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP)- CFDA No.97.078- This program provides
funds to increase the preparedness capabilities of jurisdictions responsible for the safety
and security of communities surrounding high-priority Critical Infrastructure and Key
Resource (CIKR) assets through planning and equipment acquisition.
57
STATE OF ILLINOIS
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS, EXPENDITURES AND LAPSED BALANCES
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2011
Approximate
Lapse Period
Expenditures Expenditures Approximate
Appropriations Through July I to Total
(Net after Transfers} June 30, 2011 AUjlUSt 31,2011 Ex!!!:nditures
APPROPRIATED FUNDS
General Revenue - 0001 $ 95,959,000 $ 76,248,400 $ 19,285,606 $ 95,534,006
Capital Development- 0141 46,295,230 361,444 46,115 401,559
State Garage Revolving - 0303 58,671,900 29,437,155 7,751,800 37,188,955
Statistical Services Revolving - 0304 180,678,600 106,953,771 25,002,923 131,956,694
Communications Revolving- 0312 154,779,400 92,968,898 10,144,621 103,113,519
Facilities Management Revolving - 0314 303,296,1 00 144,368,772 46,270,875 190,639,647
Professional Services - 0317 15,000,000 6,103,528 436,939 6,540,467
Workers' Compensation Revolving- 0332 127,924,000 109,910,192 17,966,265 127,876,457
Minority and Female Business Enterprise - 0352 50,000
Group Insurance Premium - 0457 95,740,100 70,715,339 14,280,378 84,995,717
American Recovery & Reinvestment Act Administrative Revolving - 0693 20,000,000
State Employees' Deferred Compensation Plan- 0755 1,209,900 941,975 52,202 994,177
State Surplus Property Revolving- 0903 3,838,000 2,920,469 554,320 3,474,789
Vl
Health Insurance Reserve - 0907 28,388,500 23,184,446 1,432,184 24,616,630
00 Total appropriated funds $ 1,131,830,730 664,114,389 143,224,228 807,338,617
NON-APPROPRIATED FUNDS
Local Gov't Health Insurance Reserve - 0193 N/A 516,495 46,339 562,834
Flexible Spending Account- 0202 N/A 30,302,795 232,633 30,535,428
Teacher Health Insurance Security - 0203 N/A 1,676,285 221,517 1,897,802
Communications Revolving- 0312 N/A 3,701,851 2,196,830 5,898,681
Community College Health Insurance Security- 0577 N/A 357,066 31,732 388,798
State Employees' Deferred Compensation Plan- 0755 N/A 170,941,432 250,691 171,192,123
Total non-appropriated funds 207,495,924 2979,742 210,475,666
TOTAL $ 871,610,313 $ 146,203,970 $ 1,017,814,283
Note I - Appropriated amounts were authorized by Public Act 96-0956 and Public Act 96-0957
Note 2- The expenditure amounts are taken directly from the records of the State Comptroller and were reconciled with Department records.
Note 3 - The expenditure amounts are vouchers approved for payment by the Department and submitted to the State Comptroller for payment to the vendor.
Note 4 Approximate lapse period expenditures do not include interest payments approved for payment by the Department and submitted to the Comptroller for payment after August.
$
Approximate
Balances
Reappropriated
July I, 2011
45,887,671
45,887,671
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
$
$
Schedule2
Approximate
Balances
LaEsed
424,994
21,482,945
48,721,906
51,665,881
112,656,453
8,459,533
47,543
50,000
10,744,383
20,000,000
215,723
363,211
3,771,870
278,604,442
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
STATE OF ILLINOIS Schedule 2
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS, EXPENDITURES AND LAPSED BALANCES
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2010
Lapse Period
Expenditures Expenditures Balances
Appropriations Through July 1 to Total Reappropriated Balances
(Net after Transfers) June 30,2010 December 31,2010 ExEenditures Jul~ 1, 2010 LaEsed
APPROPRIATED FUNDS
General Revenue - 0001 $ 90,039,700 $ 81,315,994 $ 6,712,873 $ 88,028,867 $ $ 2,010,833
Capital Development- 0141 47,594,074 1,221,219 77,625 1,298,844 46,295,230
State Garage Revolving - 0303 58,671,900 31,162,881 10,332,916 41,495,797 17,176,103
Statistical Services Revolving- 0304 182,165,800 120,125,821 25,051,184 145,177,005 36,988,795
Communications Revolving- 0312 154,779,400 87,229,356 21,310,174 108,539,530 46,239,870
Facilities Management Revolving- 0314 303,716,500 133,190,681 67,347,294 200,537,975 I 03, 178,525
Professional Services - 0317 18,650,700 11,304,456 743,728 12,048,184 6,602,516
Workers' Compensation Revolving- 0332 127,924,000 102,099,839 23,045,406 125,145,245 2,778,755
Minority and Female Business Enterprise- 0352 50,000 50,000
Group Insurance Premium- 0457 95,740,100 69,814,794 14,140,071 83,954,865 11,785,235
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Adminstrative Revolving - 0693 20,000,000 20,000,000
State Employees' Deferred Compensation Plan- 0755 1,174,800 914,226 46,166 960,392 214,408
Vl State Surplus Property Revolving - 0903 3,838,000 2,411,665 445,719 2,857,384 980,616
\0 Health Insurance Reserve - 0907 23,388,500 18,443,966 1,152,196 19,596,162 3,792,338
Total appropriated funds $ 1,127,733,474 659,234,898 170,405,352 829,640,250 46,295,230 $ 251,797,994
NON-APPROPRIATED FUNDS
Local Gov't Health Insurance Reserve - 0193 N/A 475,525 43,578 519,103 N/A N/A
Flexible Spending Account - 0202 N/A 29,150,564 145,337 29,295,901 N/A N/A
Teacher Health Insurance Security- 0203 N/A 1,667,963 183,424 1,851,387 N/A N/A
Community College Health Insurance Security - 0577 N/A 519,367 34,745 554,112 N/A N/A
State Employees' Deferred Compensation Plan - 0755 NIA 164,237,009 343,997 164,581,006 N/A N/A
Total non-appropriated funds 196,050,428 751,081 196,801,509
TOTAL $ 855,285,326 $ 171,156,433 $ I ,026,441, 759
Note 1 - Appropriated amounts were authorized by Public Act 96-0035, Public Act 96-0039, Public Act 96-0042, Public Act 96-0046, and Public Act 96-0819
Note2- The expenditure amounts are taken directly from the records of the State Comptroller and were reconciled with Department records.
STATE OF ILLINOIS Schedule 3
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
COMPARATIVE SCHEDULE OF NET APPROPRIATIONS, EXPENDITURES
AND LAPSED BALANCES
APPROPRIATED FUNDS
Fiscal Year
2011 2010 2009
P.A. 96-0035
p .A. 96-00 3 9
p .A. 96-004 2
P.A. 96-0956 P.A. 96-0046 p .A. 95-0731
P.A. 96-0957 p .A. 96-0819 P.A. 95-0734
General Revenue - 0001
Appropriations (net after transfers) $ 95,959,000 $ 90,039,700 $ 75,966,100
Expenditures:
Personal services 8,139,728 9,242,450
Contribution to SERS 1,943,682
Contribution to social security 594,011 679,067
Group insurance 24,818,800
Contractual services 14,852,769
Travel 34,611
Commodities 44,923
Printing 14,400
Equipment 1,282
Electronic data processing 831,306
Telecommunications services 126,144
Operation of automotive equipment 3,680
Automobile liability claims 1,497,309
Payment of employee wage claims 808,578
Civil law suits - claims 1,347,400
Employee suggestion board program 458
Upward mobility program 4,420,719
Veterans job program 264,089
Vito Manullo intern program 670,029
Nurses tuition 67,706
Operational expenses, awards 8,111,765 8,389,540
Operational expenses 77,422,241 70,905,588
Governor's discretionary approp. 10,000,000
Education technology - operating and admin costs 12,758,022
Total expenditures 95,534,006 88,028,867 74,427,424
Lapsed balances $ 424,994 $ 2,010,833 $ 1,538,676
Capital Development- 0141
Appropriations (net after transfers) $ 46,295,230 $ 47,594,074 $ 8,671,994
Expenditures:
Information technology 407,559 1,298,844 577,920
Total expenditures 407,559 1,298,844 577,920
Reappropriations 45,887,671 46,295,230 8,094,074
Lapsed balances $ $ $
60
STATE OF ILLINOIS Schedule 3
DEPARTMENT OF CENTRAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
COMPARATIVE SCHEDULE OF NET APPROPRIATIONS, EXPENDITURES
AND LAPSED BALANCES
APPROPRIATED FUNDS
Fiscal Year
2011 2010 2009
P.A. 96-0035
P.A. 96-0039
p .A 96-004 2
p .A 96-0956 P.A. 96-0046 P.A. 95-0731
P.A. 96-0957 p .A 96-0819 p .A 95-0734
CMS State Project - 0302
Appropriations (net after transfers) $ $ $ 100,000
Expenditures:
Strategic marketing team services
Total expenditures
Lapsed balances $ $ $ 100,000
State Garage Revolving- 0303
Appropriations (net after transfers) $ 58,671,900 $ 58,671,900 $ 49,450,500
Expenditures:
Personal services 5,684,027 8,834,848 8,462,079
Contribution to SERS 1,591,976 2,518,790 1,792,310
Contribution to social security 421,056 653,678 627,008
Group insurance 1,517,212 2,179,354 2,226,141
Contractual services 1,331,255 1,837,203 1,653,523
Travel 7,501 4,471 3,813
Commodities 70,080 66,199 73,542
Printing 10,839 6,435 1,217
Equipment 806,657 415,833 364,135
Electronic data processing 704,732 862,801 843,514
Telecommunications services 50,405 55,005 91,988
Operation of automotive equipment 24,466,429 23,550,962 22,334,665
For General and Regulatory/ Shared Services Center 526,711 510,156 472,571
Refunds 75 62 824
Total expenditures 37,188,955 41,495,797 38,947,330
Lapsed balances $ 21,482,945 $ 17,176,103 $ 10,503,170
Statistical Services Revolving- 0304
Appropriations (net after transfers) $ 180,678,600 $ 182,165,800 $ 179,635,900
Expenditures:
Personal services 41,481,467 43,481,236 43,008,691
Contribution to SERS 11,626,487 12,362,479 9,068,612
Contribution to social security 3,048,163 3,200,065 3,171,007
Group insurance 7,720,140 7,659,443 7,943,233
Contractual services 482,904 629,264 1,662,532
Travel 35,987 44,033 84,488
Commodities 18,950 31,882 33,588
Printing 14,754 70,184 17,710
Equipment 75 2,941 20,247
Electronic data processing 62,180,470 65,228,142 54,605,829
Telecommunications services 2,588,888 1,894,866 22,385
Operation of automotive equipment 75,555 42,617 53,547
For General and Regulatory/ Shared Services Center 945,222 1,029,853 988,165
Refunds 1,737,632 9,500,000
Total expenditures 131,956,694 145,177,005 120,680,034
Lapsed balances $ 48,721,906 $ 36,988,795 $ 58,955,866
61
STATE