REPORT DIGEST

CHICAGO STATE UNIVERSITY

COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024

Release Date:  May 20, 2025

FINDINGS THIS AUDIT: 14

CATEGORY:  NEW -- REPEAT – TOTAL
Category 1:  0 -- 5 -- 5
Category 2:  2 -- 7 -- 9
Category 3:  0 -- 0 -- 0
TOTAL:  2 -- 12 -- 14

FINDINGS LAST AUDIT: 16

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

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

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

INTRODUCTION

This digest covers the Compliance
Examination of Chicago State University
(University) for the year ended June 30,
2024.  A separate digest covering the
University’s financial audit as of and for
the year ended June 30, 2024, was previously
released on March 13, 2025.  In addition, a
separate digest covering the University’s
Single Audit for the year ended June 30,
2024, was previously released on March 25,
2025.  In total, this report contains
fourteen findings, four of which were
reported in the Financial Audit and Single
Audit collectively.

SYNOPSIS

• (24-05) The University did not maintain
adequate controls over its equipment.
• (24-06) The University did not maintain
adequate controls over personal services.
• (24-07) The University did not have
adequate controls over contractual services
expenditures.

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER EQUIPMENT

The Chicago State University (University)
did not maintain adequate controls over its
equipment.

We noted the University submitted its Annual
Certification of Inventory (Certification)
to the Department of Central Management
Services (CMS) 229 days late.

Further, we reviewed the University’s
Certification submitted to the CMS. The
Certification reported 352 unlocated items
amounting to $748,411 or 4% of the total
dollar amount of University equipment. Of
the 352 unlocated equipment items:

• 248 (70%) items consisting of iPad,
laptops, uninterruptible power supply unit
(UPS), and central processing units (CPUs),
totaling $188,281, were missing from the
Information Technology Department.

• 11 (3%) items consisting of projector,
printers, X-ray tube analyzer, television,
copiers, tracking system, search device, and
meter cell, totaling $188,378, were missing
from the College of Pharmacy.

• One (1%) audio visual system, totaling
$120,537, was missing from the Pharmacy
Practice.

• Eight (2%) items consisting of lift
tables, megapress kit, extractor, air
compressor, auto scrubber, striping machine,
and hydraulic bender, totaling $62,509, were
missing from the Physical Facilities –
Planning and Management.

• Four (1%) items consisting of copier, CPU,
and compressors, totaling $36,291, were
missing from the Nursing Department.

• 32 (9%) items consisting of laptops, CPUs,
and badminton net system, totaling $21,773,
were missing from the Athletics Department.

• 48 (14%) items consisting of radio,
printer, centrifuge, copiers, laptops, cash
register, servers, auto scrubber, and iPad,
totaling $130,642, were missing from various
Departments.

Further, the University did not investigate
and/or re-examine inventory counts.

Additionally, during list to floor testing,
one of 25 (4%) equipment items, totaling
$14,978, could not be traced to the
Certification submitted to CMS. In addition,
during floor to list testing, nine of 25
(36%) equipment items could not be traced to
the Certification submitted to CMS and
University’s property records.

Further, during additions testing, we noted
seven of 25 (28%) equipment items, totaling
$45,295, were recorded in the University’s
property records more than 90 days after
acquisition, ranging from 10 to 198 days
late.

Finally, during testing of canceled wireless
communication devices, we noted the
University was unable to provide
documentation to determine if the devices
had been returned in a timely manner for
three of four (75%) employees that left the
University or received an upgraded device.
(Finding 5, pages 21-24)

We recommended the University strengthen its
controls over equipment and investigate or
re-examine large discrepancies identified
during its annual inventory counts. In
addition, we recommended the University
ensure property records accurately reflect
equipment on-hand, equipment items are
timely inventoried, and the Certification is
timely submitted to CMS in accordance with
State laws and regulations.  Finally, we
recommended the University implement a
formal documentation process for requesting
and approving any cancellations or changes
to wireless communication device services or
assignments and establish internal controls
to ensure the timely retrieval of wireless
communication devices and the cancellation
of telecommunication services when an
employee leaves the University or upgrades
their device.

The University agreed with the
recommendation and indicated internal
reconciliation of equipment will be
performed, and the additional oversight will
begin with the Summer 2025. The University
further indicated management would implement
a formal, centralized process to track the
issuance, return, and cancellation of
telecommunication devices.

INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER PERSONAL SERVICES

The University did not maintain adequate
controls over personal services.

During review of 60 employees’ personnel
files, we noted the following:

• Five (8%) employees’ gross pay rates did
not agree with the established rates per the
State Universities Civil Service System
(SUCSS).

• Three (5%) employees’ gross pay rates
could not be traced to the SUCSS.

• 38 (63%) employees’ W-4 forms could not be
located.

• One (2%) employee’s retirement deduction
was incorrectly calculated.

During testing of 60 employees’ timesheets,
we noted the following:

• 24 (40%) employees’ timesheets could not
be located.

• One (2%) employee’s timesheet was approved
three days late.

• Two (3%) employees’ timesheets were not
approved by the employee’s supervisor.

During testing of 60 employees’ overtime
records, we noted the following:

• 28 (47%) employees’ overtime timecards
could not be located.

• 32 (53%) employees did not obtain prior
authorization in order to work overtime.

• Six (10%) employees’ overtime hours per
timecards did not agree with University
records. Specifically, we noted
discrepancies ranging from eight to 56
hours.

During testing of leave of absences for five
employees, we noted the following:

• One (20%) employee’s leave request form
was not signed by the employee’s supervisor.

• Three (60%) employees’ leave request forms
could not be located.

• Two (40%) employees were overpaid,
totaling $7,983, during their period of
leave of absence.

During review of 40 employees’ accrued leave
balances, we noted five (13%) employees’
accrued leave balances were incorrectly
calculated, with discrepancies ranging from
48 to 168 hours.

During testing of 15 terminated employees,
we noted two (13%) terminated employees’
lump sum payments were incorrectly
calculated, with discrepancies ranging from
288 to 383 hours.

During testing of 60 employees’ performance
evaluations, we noted the following:

• Four (7%) employees’ performance
evaluations were not completed.

• Seven (12%) employees’ performance
evaluations were completed three to 30 days
late.

• Four (7%) employees’ performance
evaluations were not signed by the
employees, as required.

• One (2%) employee’s performance evaluation
had no indication of the completion date.

During testing of 60 employees’ training
requirements, we noted the following:

• One (2%) new employee did not complete the
initial harassment and discrimination
prevention training.

• Two (3%) employees did not complete the
annual Identity Protection Act training.

• Four (7%) employees completed the annual
Identity Protection Act training five to 32
days late. (Finding 6, pages 25-29). This
finding has been reported since 2022.

We recommended the University strengthen
controls over personal services to ensure
employee timesheets, overtime timecards, and
leave requests are maintained and approved
by their supervisors and W-4 forms are
properly maintained. In addition, we
recommended the University ensure employees’
gross pay rates, retirement deductions,
terminated employees’ lump sum payments, and
accrued leave calculations are accurate.
Further, we recommended the University
ensure employees complete the required
trainings in accordance with the State
Officials and Employees Ethics Act and
Identity Protection Act. Lastly, we
recommended the University enforce
monitoring procedures to ensure employee
performance evaluations are timely
completed.

The University agreed with the
recommendations and indicated it will work
to implement controls over payroll and leave
processes, required training, and completion
of performance evaluations.

INADEQUATE CONTROLS OVER CONTRACTUAL
SERVICES EXPENDITURES

The University did not have adequate
controls over contractual services
expenditures.

During our testing of contractual
agreements, we requested the University to
provide the population of contractual
agreements including interagency agreements
entered into during the examination period.
In response to this request, the University
provided a listing of purchase orders issued
during the examination period. However, upon
checking the completeness and accuracy of
the listing provided, we noted the
following:

• The University did not maintain an up-to-
date list of new and existing contracts
effective for the examination period.

• Multiple purchase orders can be linked to
a single contract. Therefore, a single
purchase order does not necessarily indicate
a new contract. As such, we were unable to
determine the completeness of new contracts
based on the purchase order listing.

In addition, the University was unable to
provide a listing of interagency agreements.

Further, during our review of 33 contracts
(totaling $3,127,481), including purchase
orders, executed during the fiscal year
ended June 30, 2024, we noted the following:

• Four contracts (totaling $218,817) were
executed subsequent to the start date of the
contracts. The contract execution dates
ranged from 7 to 89 days from the
commencement of services.

• Three exempt purchases (totaling $742,949)
were not published in the Illinois
Procurement Bulletin, while three exempt
purchases (totaling $346,441) were published
14 to 89 days late.

• One contract amounting to $23,400 was not
approved by the authorized staff. (Finding
7, pages 30-32). This finding has been
reported since 2016.

We recommended the University maintain a
complete and accurate list of contractual
agreements. In addition, we recommended the
University establish appropriate procedures
to ensure all contracts are signed and
executed prior to the commencement of
services. Further, we recommended the
University review its procedures to ensure
exempt purchases are timely published in the
Illinois Procurement Bulletin.

The University agreed with the
recommendation and indicated a contract
management software would be deployed in
Fiscal Year 2026, which will provide
contract repository, visibility, contract
creation, contract performance management,
and other features to improve contract
efficiency at the University.

OTHER FINDINGS

The remaining findings pertain to inadequate
internal controls over Census Data,
weaknesses over computer security,
inadequate controls to ensure compliance
with the Illinois Pension Code, failure to
notify students and parents upon
disbursement of funds, failure to prepare
and file the Agency Workforce Report, lack
of adequate controls over review of internal
controls over service providers, Census Data
reconciliation, weaknesses in cybersecurity
programs and practices, inadequate disaster
recovery process,  weaknesses with Payment
Card Industry Data Security Standards, and
weaknesses over maintenance of employment
eligibility verification forms. We will
review the University’s progress towards the
implementation of our recommendations in our
next State compliance examination.

AUDITOR’S OPINIONS

The financial audit was previously released.
Our auditors stated the financial statements
of the University as of and for the year
ended June 30, 2024 are fairly stated in all
material respects.

The Single Audit was also previously
released. Our auditors conducted a Single
Audit of the University as required by the
Uniform Guidance and stated the University
complied, in all material respects, with the
types of compliance requirements that could
have a direct and material effect on the
University’s major federal programs for the
year ended June 30, 2024.

ACCOUNTANT’S OPINION

The accountants conducted a State compliance
examination of the University for the year
ended June 30, 2024, as required by the
Illinois State Auditing Act.  The
accountants qualified their report on State
compliance for Findings 2024-002, 2024-003,
2024-005, 2024-006, and 2024-007.  Except
for the noncompliance described in these
findings, the accountants stated the
University complied, in all material
respects, with the requirements described in
the report.

This State compliance examination was
conducted by Roth & Company, LLP.

COURTNEY DZIERWA
Division Director

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

FRANK J. MAUTINO
Auditor General

FJM:vrb