|
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
INCOMPLETE AND UNTIMELY CHILD WELFARE AND FOSTER
CARE FILES
The Department’s Child Welfare and Foster
Care files lacked required documentation and not all case procedures were performed
timely. During our review of 60 case
files, we noted:
-
4
administrative case reviews (ACRs) were not performed.
-
16 ACR
notifications were not sent.
-
3 health
summaries were not in the file.
-
7 education
and development summaries were not in the file.
-
32 medical
and dental consent forms were not in the file or were outdated.
-
9 placement
and payment authorization forms did not contain all required documentation or
were not in the file.
-
26 files did
not contain current photographs of the child.
-
34 files did
not contain fingerprints of the child.
-
21 files did
not contain required permanency hearing information.
-
40 permanency
planning checklists were not in the file.
-
4 case entry
forms were not in the file.
-
7 child
summary forms were not in the file.
-
2 children
absent from placement forms were not in the file.
-
15 case
review forms were not in the file.
-
27 initial
placement checklist forms were not in the file.
The Department’s Administrative Procedures
prescribe deadlines and documentation requirements for file maintenance. The failure to follow established
Department procedures could result in inadequate care, unauthorized services
or misuse of State funds. (Finding 1,
pages 11-14) This finding was first reported in 1998.
Department
officials stated they will continue to stress the importance of adequate and
timely documentation for the placement files. (For the previous agency response, see Digest Footnote #1.)
OVERDUE CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DETERMINATIONS
Reports of child abuse and neglect were not always determined
within 60 days as required by the Abused and Neglected Child Reporting
Act. The Act states the Department
shall determine, within 60 days, whether a report is "unfounded" or
"indicated" and provides that the Department may extend the period
up to an additional 30 days for good cause.
Department statistics indicate the following noncompliance:
Total
Reports Determinations Percent of
Fiscal
Requiring
Not Determinations
Year Determinations In Compliance Not In Compliance
2006 66,593 1,060 1.59%
2005 66,550 1,140 1.71%
2004 62,069 1,294 2.08%
2003 58,956 952 1.61%
2002 59,080 492 0.83%
2001 59,003 226 0.38%
2000 61,787 187 0.30%
1999 62,054 1,502 2.42%
1998 65,877 2,125 3.23%
Failure to make a determination of a report within 60 days is
a violation of the Act, could delay the implementation of a service plan, and
could result in further endangerment of the child. (Finding 2, pages 15-16)
This finding was first reported
in 1998.
We recommended the Department determine reports of child
abuse or neglect within 60 days as mandated by State law.
Department officials stated they will continue in their
efforts to be within 100% compliance of the timeframes set forth in the
Act. (For the previous agency
response, see Digest Footnote #2.)
NEED TO INITIATE INVESTIGATIONS WITHIN 24 HOURS OF RECEIPT
The Department did not initiate an investigation of every
child abuse and neglect case within 24 hours of receipt of the report as
required by the Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act. Department statistics indicate the
following noncompliance:
Investigations Percent of
Fiscal
Total Not Investigations
Year Investigations In Compliance Not In Compliance
2006 66,918 154 0.23%
2005 66,793 260 0.39%
2004 62,311 268 0.43%
2003 59,397 220 0.37%
2002 59,241 517 0.87%
2001 60,054 141 0.23%
2000 61,787 219 0.35%
1999 62,618 250 0.40%
1998 65,862 461 0.70%
Failure to respond to a report of abuse or neglect within 24
hours is a violation of the Act and could result in further endangerment of
the child. (Finding 3, page 17) This
finding was first reported in 1998.
We recommended the Department continue to strive to initiate
investigations of all child abuse and neglect reports within 24 hours of
receiving the report as mandated by State law.
Department officials agreed with the recommendation and
stated they will continue to make efforts to be within 100% compliance of the
timeframes established. They plan to
explore corrective action for employees who fail to comply with the Act. (For the previous agency response, see
Digest Footnote #3.)
UNTIMELY APPROVAL OF
CONTRACTS
The Department did not have an adequate system in place to
ensure that contracts are reviewed and signed on a timely basis. During our review of 20 contracts, we
noted that 16 contracts, totaling $40,967,627, were signed after the
beginning of the contract period. All
contracts must be approved prior to services being performed in accordance
with Statewide Accounting Management System procedures. Failure to obtain signed contracts before
the beginning of the contract period does not bind the contractor to comply
with applicable laws, regulations, and rules and may result in improper and
unauthorized payments. (Finding 5,
page 19). This finding was first
reported in 2002.
We recommended the Department approve and sign all contracts
before the beginning of the contract period.
Department officials agreed and stated they will continue to
improve processes that ensure all contracts are approved and signed before
the beginning of the contract period.
They provided statistics showing improvement in Fiscal Year 2006. (For the previous agency response, see
Digest Footnote #4.)
EMPLOYEES
WORKED OVERTIME WITHOUT PROPER PRIOR APPROVAL
Department employees worked overtime without proper prior
approval. Department policy requires
supervisory approval of overtime before it is worked. We selected a sample of 32 employees and
reviewed each person’s overtime during May 2006. Overtime was incurred on 28 days for those employees. We noted:
-
overtime approval was not documented for 2 days,
-
overtime approval forms for 8 days were signed from 1 to 65
days after it was worked,
-
an overtime approval form for 1 day was signed, but not
dated,
-
overtime incurred on a call-back basis for 10 days had
inadequate approval documentation, and
-
overtime incurred on a call-back basis for 3 days was
approved from 47 to 49 days after it was worked.
Failure to
obtain proper prior approval for overtime may result in an employee being
compensated for overtime not actually performed or warranted. During fiscal year 2006, $3,354,286 was
paid to 1,884 employees for overtime.
(Finding 7, pages 21-22) This
finding was first reported in 2002.
We recommended the Department strictly enforce its
policies and procedures in regards to timekeeping and overtime.
Department officials agreed and stated they will remind
supervisors to review, approve, and date requests for overtime timely as
required. (For the previous agency
response, see Digest Footnote #5.)
EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS NOT TIMELY
Annual
employee performance evaluations were not completed on a timely basis. In our sample of 32 employees, we noted 15
performance evaluations performed during FY 06 were from 11 to 198 days late,
and 12 employees did not receive an evaluation during the current year.
The Illinois Administrative Code states that performance
evaluations should be considered when determining salary increases,
promotions, layoffs, discipline, and other changes in an employee’s
status. The Department has an
internal policy requiring evaluations on at least an annual basis. Delays in completing performance
evaluations cause the payroll department to manually calculate lump sum
salary adjustments. Manual calculations
are not only time consuming but are also more prone to errors. (Finding 9, page 24) This finding was first reported in
2005.
We recommended the Department strictly enforce the existing
policies regarding timely completion of performance evaluations.
Department officials agreed and indicated steps will be taken
to streamline the evaluation process.
(For the previous agency response, see Digest Footnote #6.)
INADEQUATE CONTRACT PROVISIONS
The
Department’s contracts with residential and group home service providers did
not all include measurable criteria necessary to ensure desired results are
achieved. In a sample of 12 such
contracts we noted that 4 did not include specific, measurable criteria
within the contract. The Department
created the Residential Performance Monitoring Unit (RPMU) to conduct on-site
monitoring of the facilities that provide treatment for children. Any deficiencies identified in the site
visits are communicated to the Department’s Division of Placement and
Permanency which either directs the RPMU to increase the monitoring of the
deficient provider or program consultants are utilized.
Department officials stated that they are in the process of
modifying residential care contracts to include monitoring and participation
requirements that were recommended by the RPMU. The absence or insufficiency of these contract requirements
could lead to disputes with providers and impede the Department’s ability to
effectively monitor programs.
(Finding 10, pages 25-26) This
finding was first reported in 2003.
We recommended the Department continue in its efforts to
develop and include measurable criteria and participation requirements in its
contracts with residential and group home service providers.
Department officials agreed with our recommendation. (For the previous agency response, see
Digest Footnote #7.)
OTHER FINDINGS
The
remaining findings are reportedly being given attention by the
Department. We will review progress
toward the implementation of our recommendations during the next examination.
AUDITORS’ OPINION
Our
auditors stated the Department's June 30, 2006 financial statements are
fairly presented in all material respects.
____________________________________
WILLIAM
G. HOLLAND, Auditor General
WGH:KMA:pp
SPECIAL ASSISTANT AUDITORS
Our special assistant auditors were Sleeper, Disbrow,
Morrison, Tarro & Lively, LLC.
DIGEST
FOOTNOTES
#1: INCOMPLETE AND UNTIMELY CHILD WELFARE AND FOSTER CARE FILES -
Previous Agency Response
The Department agrees and will continue to stress
the importance of adequate and timely documentation for the placement cases
identified by the auditor’s findings as well as for all child and family
cases.
#2: OVERDUE CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT DETERMINATIONS - Previous
Agency Response
The Department agrees and will continue to make
diligent efforts to be within 100% compliance of the timeframes set forth in
ANCRA for making final determinations.
#3: NEED TO INITIATE INVESTIGATIONS WITHIN 24 HOURS OF RECEIPT -
Previous Agency Response
The Department agrees with the recommendation and
plans to explore corrective action for employees who fail to initiate
investigations within the 24-hour timeframe.
#4: UNTIMELY APPROVAL OF CONTRACTS - Previous Agency Response
The Department agrees and will continue to improve
processes that ensure that all contracts are approved and signed before the
beginning of the contract period. In
FY 06, our revised procedures, which included completion of the required
Procurement Business Cases, resulted in 1,031 contracts being mailed to
providers prior to July 1, an increase of 532 from FY 05. Comparison of the number of contracts
returned and processed also shows improvement, as follows:
Contracts Processed FY 06 FY 05
Prior to July 1 196 0
Within 30 days of July 1
879 577
Within 60 days of July 1
421 642
Within 90 days of July 1
189 398
#5: EMPLOYEES WORKED OVERTIME WITHOUT PROPER PRIOR APPROVAL -
Previous Agency Response
The Department agrees that no employee should be
compensated for overtime unless it was worked and authorized. We will work to remind supervisors to
review, approve, and date requests for overtime timely in accordance with
Department procedure and/or supplemental labor agreements.
#6: EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS NOT TIMELY - Previous Agency Response
The Department agrees that performance evaluations
should be completed timely. With the
recent (December 2005) announcement of pay raises, an intense effort has been
undertaken to see that all evaluations are brought up to date.
#7: INADEQUATE CONTRACT PROVISIONS – Previous Agency Response
The Department plans to continue its efforts to
include measurable criteria and participation requirements in all its
contracts with residential and group homes service providers. We expect that the finalization of these
efforts will be completed in the later part of 2006.
|
