REPORT DIGEST

ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT

(Including Appellate Court Districts 1-5 and the Illinois Courts Commission)

COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION

For the Two Years Ended:

June 30, 2007

Summary of Findings:

Total this audit                    1

Total last audit                    3

Repeated from last audit     1

Release Date:

April 24, 2008

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.auditor.illinois.gov

SYNOPSIS

•      The Supreme Court incurred food and beverage costs while hosting conferences and seminars for judges that exceed the travel reimbursement rates for individual meals.

{Expenditures and Activity Measures are summarized on the reverse page.}

Cost per meal ranged from $11.88 to $48.44

Agency officials disagree

Auditors’ Comment

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

EXCESSIVE MEAL COSTS

      The Illinois Supreme Court (Court) incurred food and beverage costs while hosting conferences and seminars for judges that exceed the travel reimbursement rates for individual meals.  The cost per meal paid from the General Revenue Fund for four conferences held in Chicago and one conference held in Springfield ranged from $11.88 to $48.44.

The Judicial Branch Travel Reimbursement for Judges (Guidelines) establishes a rate of $8.00 for breakfast and $8.00 for lunch for reimbursement for meal costs to judges in Chicago and $7.00 for breakfast and $7.00 for lunch for reimbursement for meal costs to judges downstate.  Although these rates apply only to reimbursements to judges and the Guidelines do not set rates for Court sponsored conferences and seminars, these are reasonable guidelines for the cost of meals.  (Finding 1, pages 10-13)

We recommended the Court amend its Guidelines to clearly address meal rates allowable at Court sponsored conferences and seminars.

Agency officials disagreed with the finding and responded that the finding of excessive meal costs is erroneously premised on the Judicial Branch Travel Guidelines (Guidelines). The Guidelines, which set forth the rates at which meals and travel will be reimbursed to judicial officers traveling on judicial branch business, are inapplicable to the events cited in the finding. Meal costs associated with judicial conferences and seminars bear no relationship with meal reimbursement rates for judicial branch travelers. They went on to state that it is their position that contracts for conferences and seminars should be tested for compliance with the Judicial Branch Procurement Code (Code). Absent consideration of all relevant factors which were considered in awarding the contracts for the cited events, no opinion may properly be expressed concerning costs. In any case, there is no assertion that the award of contracts for the events were not in compliance with the Code.

In an auditors’ comment we stated the Court maintains, “Contracts for conferences and seminars should be tested for compliance against the Code” and “…it is our position that meal costs as one component of the entire contract, although expensive, are not unreasonably excessive.” We acknowledge the Court is moving in the right direction by competitively bidding its conference contracts. However, regardless of whether the conference is bid or not, standards followed by the auditors in conducting attestation engagements require auditors to “be alert to situations or transactions that could be indicative of abuse…” Government Auditing Standards, Section 6.15 (c). Those standards go on in Section 6.19 to state that:

[a]buse is distinct from fraud, illegal acts, or violations of provisions of contracts or grant agreements. When abuse occurs, no law, regulation, or provision of a contract or agreement is violated. Rather, abuse involves behavior that is deficient or improper when compared with behavior that a prudent person would consider reasonable and necessary business practice given the facts and circumstances.

We respectfully submit and continue to believe that the Court’s payment of conference meal costs of up to five times greater than the maximum meal cost permitted in the travel guidelines is excessive.

AUDITORS’ OPINION

We conducted a compliance examination of the Illinois Supreme Court as required by the Illinois State Auditing Act.  We have not audited any financial statements of the Court for the purpose of expressing an opinion because the agency does not, nor is it required to, prepare financial statements.

_____________________________________

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND, Auditor General

WGH:GSR

SPECIAL ASSISTANT AUDITORS

      Our Special Assistant Auditors were Sikich, LLP