REPORT DIGEST

 

ILLINOIS HOUSING

DEVELOPMENT

AUTHORITY

 

 

 

FINANCIAL AUDIT

For the Year Ended:

June 30, 2007

 

 

 

Release Date:

November 8, 2007

 

 

Seal of the State of Illinois

 

 

State of Illinois

Office of the Auditor General

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND

AUDITOR GENERAL

 

To obtain a copy of the Report contact:

Office of the Auditor General

Iles Park Plaza

740 E. Ash Street

Springfield, IL 62703

(217) 782-6046 or TTY (888) 261-2887

 

This Report Digest and the Full Report are available on

the worldwide web at

http://www.auditor.illinois.gov

 

 

 

SYNOPSIS

 

 

¨      The Authority did not document the rationale for the decisions made to support the risk ratings assigned to all program loans under the new loan rating methodology.

 

¨      The Authority does not have an adequate process for the establishment of new loans in the loan subsidiary system.

 

¨      The Authority does not have an adequate process for reconciling the general ledger with the subsidiary ledger used to account for deposits held in escrow.

 

¨      The Authority does not have an adequate process for calculating and reporting the loss on debt refunding transactions.

 

 


 

 

 

ILLINOIS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

FINANCIAL AUDIT

For The Year Ended June 30, 2007

 

 

FINANCIAL POSITION – ALL FUNDS

June 30, 2007

June 30, 2006

Assets

      Cash and investments – unrestricted.............

      Investments – restricted..............................

      Net program loans receivable.......................

      Other........................................................

            Total...................................................

Liabilities

      Bonds and notes payable.............................

      Due to State of Illinois................................

      Deposits held in escrow..............................

      Other........................................................

            Total...................................................

Net Assets

      Invested in capital assets, net.......................

      Restricted..................................................

      Unrestricted...............................................

            Total...................................................

 

       $157,598,730

         635,752,493

      1,785,273,986

           61,737,230

    $2,640,362,439

 

    $1,587,520,899

         316,383,098

         158,952,248

           66,607,837

    $2,129,464,082

 

             $203,532

         425,135,012

           85,559,813

       $510,898,357

 

 

 

    $   174,917,442

         545,753,663

      1,603,739,186

           68,978,840

    $ 2,393,389,131

 

    $ 1,422,672,934

        276,480,567

         142,196,331

           94,058,580

    $ 1,935,408,412

 

    $         361,800

         376,420,706

           81,198,213

    $   457,980,719

 

ADMINISTRATIVE FUND OPERATIONS

FY 2007

FY 2006

Revenues

      Service fees...............................................

      Interest and investment income....................

      Federal assistance programs........................

      Transfers, net............................................

      Other........................................................

            Total...................................................

Expenses

      Salaries and benefits...................................

      Professional fees........................................

      Other general and administrative...................

      Transfers, net............................................

      Financing Costs.........................................

      Federal assistance programs........................

      Provision (reversal) for est. loss on loans receivable...............................................

      Other........................................................

            Total...................................................

Change in net assets.........................................

 

          $9,960,474

           5,097,184

        147,397,197

                        -

           5,983,977

      $168,438,832

 

        $11,958,570

           1,895,699

           3,503,945

           1,742,737

              413,690

        147,397,197

 

          (5,998,000)

           1,677,866

      $162,591,704

          $5,847,128

 

           $9,779,430

            4,240,372

         148,171,776

            3,810,549

            8,321,621

       $174,323,748

 

         $11,125,975

            1,163,780

            3,442,719

                       ---

               471,587

         148,171,776

 

            3,545,000

                         -

       $167,920,837

           $6,402,911

 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

 

 

During Audit Period:  Kelly King Dibble, DeShana Forney (eff. 1-19-07)

Currently:  DeShana Forney

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Loan risk rating decisions not fully documented

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New loans entered in system need additional review

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ledgers not reconciled and differed by $393,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Debt refunding not accounted for correctly

 

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

       This report covers our financial audit of the Illinois Housing Development Authority, a component unit of the State of Illinois, for the year ended June 30, 2007.  Information on the results of testing performed in conjunction with our compliance attestation examination and Single Audit for the year ended June 30, 2007 will be released in a separate report.

 

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 

INCOMPLETE DOCUMENTATION FOR THE RISK RATINGS ASSIGNED TO PROGRAM LOANS

 

       The Authority did not document the rationale for the decisions made to support the risk ratings assigned to all program loans under the new loan rating methodology.

 

       During the year ended June 30, 2007, the Authority significantly modified the methodology used to assign risk ratings to program loans.  The new methodology was formally approved by the Authority’s Board at the May 2007 Board meeting, and the Authority implemented the new methodology when assigning risk ratings to the program loans within the June 30, 2007 financial statements.  Management held meetings with the asset managers to discuss each loan, and assigned the appropriate rating to each loan under the new methodology, however the rationale for the decisions made to support the ratings was not always formally documented.

 

       The Authority has approximately $1,814,439,000 in loans outstanding at June 30, 2007.  We selected 161 loans in the multi-family, single family, and trust fund programs totaling approximately $278,287,000 or 15% of the Authority’s program loan receivables as of June 30, 2007.  For the loans that did not document the rationale for the risk rating assigned under the new methodology, we were able to observe other documentation and/or inquire of management to support the appropriateness of the risk rating and the related allowance for estimated losses.

 

 

       Without formally documenting the rationale for the decisions made to support the risk rating for each loan under the new methodology, the allowance for estimated loses could be misstated.  (Finding 1, pages 59-60)

 

       Authority officials concurred with our recommendation to implement procedures to formally document the rationale for the decisions made to support the risk rating assigned to all program loans.

 

INADEQUATE PROCESS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW LOANS IN THE LOAN SUBSIDIARY SYSTEM

 

       The Authority does not have an adequate process for the establishment of new loans in the loan subsidiary system.

 

       The Authority utilizes a loan subsidiary system (Benedict billing and receivable system) to track loan activity and the outstanding loan balances of its Multi-Family, HOME, and Affordable Trust Fund programs.  The subsidiary system provides Authority management with a formal platform to monitor program loans.  The system is updated for program loans issued to or redeemed by developments on an ongoing basis.  The system automatically generates principal and interest billing statements for distribution to developments based on the input information.

 

       During our testing we noted the Authority does not have an adequate process to ensure that new loans are accurately entered into the Benedict system.  Specifically, we noted that one individual is responsible for entering new loan information into the Benedict system without a supervisory review of the information added or changed.

 

       Without ensuring controls embedded within the Benedict system are functioning properly and can be relied upon to input and update these loan balances, the risk exists that the true outstanding loan balance and activity will not be known by management and properly reported in the financial statements.  (Finding 2, pages 60-61)  This finding was first reported in 2006.

 

       We recommended the Authority implement procedures to ensure new loans entered into the Benedict system agree to the final loan documents.

 

       Authority officials concurred with our recommendation.

 

INADEQUATE RECONCILIATION PROCEDURES FOR DEPOSITS HELD IN ESCROW

 

       The Authority does not have an adequate process for reconciling the general ledger with the subsidiary ledger used to account for deposits held in escrow.

 

       Deposits from developers, which are held in escrow in the Authority’s administrative fund, may be used when necessary to pay principal and interest payments and fund construction cost overruns, change orders, tax and insurance payments and capital improvements.  In addition, on certain developments, letters of credit and assignments of syndication proceeds are held by the Authority for similar purposes and to fund potential operating deficits of the related developments; investment income earned on deposited funds is credited to the respective developer’s escrow accounts.

 

       The Authority did not reconcile the deposits held in the escrow subsidiary ledger to the general ledger balance during the year ended June 30, 2007.  We noted at June 30, 2007, the subsidiary ledger balance used to account for the deposits held in escrow was approximately $159,345,000, and the general ledger balance for the deposits held in escrow was approximately $158,952,000, resulting in a difference of approximately $393,000.  The Authority could not identify the reason for the difference.

 

       Without reconciling the deposits held in escrow, the Authority may not have adequate funds on hand to satisfy liabilities incurred that are funded with escrow balances.  (Finding 3, page 62)

 

       Authority officials agreed with our recommendation to implement timely reconciliation procedures for the deposits held in escrow.

 

 

INADEQUATE PROCESS FOR CALCULATING AND REPORTING LOSS ON DEBT REFUNDING TRANSACTION

 

       The Authority does not have an adequate process for calculating and reporting the loss on debt refunding transactions.

 

       As required under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, when debt refunding transactions result in the defeasance of debt, the principal amount of the old debt and any unamortized bond issue costs, premiums or discounts associated with the defeased bonds should be removed from the financial statements.  The difference between the reacquisition price and the net carrying amount of the old debt (a gain or loss) should be recorded, deferred and amortized as a component of interest expense in a systematic and rational manner over the remaining life of the old debt or the new debt, whichever is shorter.  On the statement of net assets, this deferred amount should be reported as a deduction from or an addition to the new debt liability.

 

       During the year ended June 30, 2007, the Authority refunded approximately $107,725,000 of the Multi-Family Housing Bonds with the issuance of new housing bonds in the Mortgage Loan Program Fund, which resulted in the defeasance of debt.  The Authority did not calculate the loss on the refunding transaction, and continued to report the unamortized discounts, premiums, and issue costs pertaining to the defeased bonds in the financial statements.  We recalculated a deferred loss of $12,351,000 which was reclassified as a deduction to the outstanding balance of the new debt.

 

       Without a process in place to ensure gains or losses associated with debt refunding transactions are calculated and reported in the financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, financial statements could be materially misstated.  (Finding 4, pages 63-64)

 

       We recommended the Authority implement procedures to ensure gains and losses associated with debt refunding transactions are calculated and reported in the financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

 

       Authority officials concurred with our recommendation.

 

AUDITORS’ OPINION

 

       Our auditors state the June 30, 2007 financial statements of the Illinois Housing Development Authority are presented fairly in all material respects.

 

 

 

 

 

____________________________________

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND, Auditor General

 

 

WGH:KMA:pp

 

SPECIAL ASSISTANT AUDITORS

 

       KPMG LLP were our special assistant auditors for the audit.