REPORT DIGEST JOINT COMMITTEE ON
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION For the Two Years Ended: June 30, 2004 Summary of Findings: Total this audit 2 Total last audit 2 Repeated from last audit 2 Release Date: February 24, 2005
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 is also
available on the worldwide web at http://www.state.il.us/auditor |
SYNOPSIS ¨ JCAR did not fully comply with the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act which requires the evaluation of all agency rules at least once every five years. ¨ JCAR did not file its required Annual Reports to the General Assembly timely.
{Expenditures and Activity Measures are summarized on the reverse page.} |
JOINT
COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
COMPLIANCE
AUDIT
For
The Two Years Ended June 30, 2004
EXPENDITURE STATISTICS |
FY 2004 |
FY 2003 |
FY 2002 |
! Total Expenditures (All Funds)................... |
$944,955 |
$1,006,538 |
$955,277 |
OPERATIONS
TOTAL................................. % of Total Expenditures......................... |
$944,955 100.00% |
$1,006,538 100.00% |
$955,277 100.00% |
Personal Services................................... % of
Operations Expenditures........... Average No. of Employees............... |
$728,474 77.09% 19 |
$763,584 75.86% 20 |
$731,213 76.54% 20 |
Other Payroll Costs (FICA, Retirement).................................................... % of Operations Expenditures........... |
$150,961 15.98% |
$165,246 16.42% |
$156,875 16.42% |
Contractual Services.............................. % of Operations Expenditures........... |
$29,874 3.16% |
$27,976 2.78% |
$25,873 2.71% |
All Other Operations Items..................... % of
Operations Expenditures........... |
$35,646 3.77% |
$49,732 4.94% |
$41,316 4.33% |
! Cost of Property
and Equipment................. |
$148,905 |
$153,540 |
$145,005 |
SELECTED
ACTIVITY MEASURES* |
2004 (as of
7/26/04) |
2003 |
2002 |
Rules received......................................................... Rules reviewed........................................................ Recommendations made.......................................... Objections............................................................... * calendar year basis |
285 280 18 9 |
509 483 11 8 |
618 595 17 16 |
AGENCY DIRECTOR |
During Audit Period: Ms. Vicki Thomas Currently: Ms. Vicki Thomas |
Evaluation of
agency rules
Annual Reports filed 60 and 94 days late |
FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) did not fully comply with the Illinois Administrative Procedure Act (5 ILCS 100 et seq.). The Act requires the evaluation of all rules of each agency at least once every five years. The Act also requires JCAR to perform a systematic and continuing study of existing rules or the existing rulemaking process of agencies and to make periodic investigations of the rulemaking activities of all agencies. We noted that JCAR was not in compliance with these provisions of the Act. We recommended JCAR either develop and implement a formal long range plan which addresses methods to bring its operations into compliance with these statutory requirements or seek appropriate legislative remedy. (Finding 1, pages 8-10) JCAR officials responded they will again consider legislative changes when it devises its legislative recommendations for 2005. This finding was first reported in 1988. (For the previous agency response, see Digest Footnote 1.) FAILURE TO TIMELY REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) did not file its Annual Reports to the General Assembly in a timely manner. The 2002 Annual Report was filed 60 days late and the 2003 Annual Report was filed 94 days late. We recommended JCAR submit to the General Assembly a report of its findings, conclusions and recommendations, including suggested legislation, by February 1 of each year as required by statute. (Finding 2, p. 11) JCAR officials responded that they have greatly improved upon their compliance with the annual report requirement given the staff shortage they have been operating under for more than the past two years. However, they will continue to strive for compliance in the future. This finding was first reported in 1994. (For the previous agency response, see Digest Footnote 2.) Ms. Vicki Thomas, Executive Director, provided responses to our findings and recommendations. AUDITORS’
OPINION
We conducted a compliance examination of the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) as required by the Illinois State Auditing Act. We have not audited any financial statements of the JCAR for the purpose of expressing an opinion because the JCAR does not, nor is it required to, prepare financial statements. ____________________________________ WILLIAM G. HOLLAND, Auditor General WGH:JSC:pp ASSIGNED
AUDITORS
The compliance examination was conducted by the Auditor General’s staff. DIGEST
FOOTNOTES #1:
NONCOMPLIANCE WITH ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT - Previous
Agency Response 2002: "JCAR acknowledges that is has not been
able to carry out the statutory requirement that it conduct a five-year
review of all the rules of all State agencies. During four years early in JCAR's history (1980-83), an attempt
was made to conduct these reviews, but that effort had to be abandoned for
lack of adequate staff resources to conduct both on-going review of new
regulations and the five-year periodic review. To responsibly fulfill both of these mandates would require at
least twice the staff resources that have been available to JCAR. In view of the present levels of
staffing, JCAR like every other State agency with limited resources, has had
to set priorities. It has chosen to
give more priority to ongoing review of new rules and amendments to existing
rules than to a structured five-year review for several reasons. First, a review of all existing
rules every five years would have the main advantage of removing from the
Code any rules that are no longer necessary, streamlining rules that have
been adopted piecemeal over the years, and updating language to the currently
preferred plain language style.
However, those rules have been in existence for several years without
cataclysmic results. In recognition
of this, JCAR believes it has acted responsibly in giving priority to
reviewing new rules and new regulatory schemes, the reasonableness of which
has not been tested by time. Second, the goals of culling
outdated rules, streamlining rules and improving their readability is served
to a great degree within the on-going review program. Some agencies initiate this type of
cleanup with diligence, and JCAR promotes review of existing text as part of
its review of every amendatory rulemaking.
Third, the initial responsibility
for Code cleanup lies not with JCAR, but with the administrative
agencies. They created the
regulations and they work continually with the affected public in their
implementation of those regulations.
JCAR’s conduct of a five-year review would serve mainly to force an
agency to periodically give priority to initiating a self-review and cleanup
if it has not been able to do so in the course of its normal activities. The absence of formal five-year review
does not mean that existing rule is not reviewed, because many agencies are
commendably responsible in continually reviewing their own rules. Fourth, JCAR gives strong priority
to its complaint review program as well as its proposed rule review
program. If, after an existing
regulation has been time tested, any member of the public brings a complaint
about the regulation to JCAR, staff will initiate a preliminary review and
report the issue to the JCAR membership.
JCAR can then vote to officially pursue the issue with the
agency. In partnership with the
affected public, JCAR has been able to concentrate its limited resources on
existing rules that are problematic, rather than dedicating countless hours
to review of adequate and responsible rules.
The auditors recommend that if JCAR
cannot conduct five-year review, it seek an amendment to the Administrative
Procedure Act to change the current mandatory requirement for such
review. As this finding points out,
such legislation has been initiated in the past, but without passage. JCAR will again consider this issue when
it devises its legislative recommendations for 2003. #2:
FAILURE TO REPORT TO GENERAL ASSEMBLY - Previous Agency Response JCAR did not file a report in February 2001; that
report was combined with the annual report due in 2002, which was filed in
March rather than February. The
personnel responsible for this report has been changed, and JCAR anticipates
that its 2003 report will be submitted in a timely manner. |
|
|