MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS:

Graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration, Public Administration, Education or a related field supplemented by two years of work experience in the investigation or compliance monitoring of programs and processes, or an equivalent combination of training  and experience provided that the minimum degree requirement is met.

NOTE: RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT: All City employees must be actual residents of the City of Chicago. Proof of residency will be required at the time of employment.

NOTE: APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED BY THE INDIVIDUAL APPLYING.  NO SECOND PARTY APPLICATIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED.

ANNUAL SALARY:
$53,844

DUTIES:

• Under supervision, audits and monitors processes and procedures to ensure compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, including the Shakman Accord. See Michael Shakman, et al. v. City of Chicago, 69 C 2145.
• Investigates and responds to compliance violations to ensure compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, including the Shakman Accord.
• Assists IGO investigative staff on relevant IGO investigations.
• Researches relevant best practices and participates in the making of recommendations to establish and modify relevant policies and procedures.
• Interprets and explains relevant ordinances, policies, and guidelines and participates in the advisement and training of operating departments on new or modified relevant procedures and practices.
• Prepares narrative and statistical reports on assigned cases.
• Collaborates and manages compliance initiatives and programs with operating departments and outside agencies.
• Performs related duties as required.

APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS:

To apply for this job title do NOT use the City of Chicago online application.

Follow these six steps:

1. Go to e-mail address jobs@chicagoinspectorgeneral.org;
2. In the subject line, type in the job title for which you are applying;
3. Complete, save and attach the “Inspector General Employment Application,” available here;
4. Attach your cover letter for this job title;
5. Attach your resume; and,
6. Attach a writing sample and college and/or graduate school transcripts.

NOTE: To be considered for this position you must provide all the information listed above. If you fail to provide this information at the time you submit your application, your submission will be incomplete and you will not be considered for an interview. Application materials will only be accepted by e-mail at jobs@chicagoinspectorgeneral.org . When there is more than one open position in which you are interested, you may apply for more than one title by submitting an individual e-mail for each title. Repeat instruction steps one through six with each e-mail.

THE CITY OF CHICAGO IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER

The audit found that Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT) was unable to substantiate its claims that the City chose to install and maintain red-light cameras at intersections with the highest angle crash rates in order to increase safety.

Additionally, the audit found that:

• CDOT was unable to produce evidence that it continually evaluates cameras for relocation, as stated in its “Intersection Prioritization Steps for Relocations”. Further, since the program started in 2003, the City has relocated only ten cameras from five intersections out of the present total of 384 cameras at 190 locations.
• For one set of cameras, the City is spending nearly 56% of the purchase price on maintenance expenditures each year.
• CDOT was unable to verify the accuracy of the information it uses to determine RLC installation locations.

“The City cannot effectively manage its programs unless it measures its programs,” said Inspector General Joe Ferguson. “In addition to finding that the City cannot prove RLC installation locations are based on safety considerations, we discovered a striking lack of basic recordkeeping and analysis for this $70 million program.”

The audit, which was designed to answer nine questions posed by six members of the City Council (and can be read via the link on the right), sought to determine if red-light camera installations were made based on CDOT’s stated primary criterion of reducing angle crashes to increase safety.

The IGO made two recommendations for the City going forward. First, the City should establish and follow clear criteria for its decisions on where to locate automated traffic law enforcement systems. Second, the City should retain records and verifiable documentation of the process for each location decision.

CDOT’s response is included in the audit. CDOT stated that it intends to review the RLC installation and removal criteria and determine what, if any modifications should be made going forward. Additionally, it has pledged to work with the winning RLC vendor to review current camera locations and ensure that the criteria have been met and appropriately documented at intersections where cameras are now located.

“I support these stated intentions and look forward to the results of the analyses, which the IGO will assess in a future audit of the program,” said Ferguson.

The audit found that although animals were housed for the minimum time frames required by ordinance, which provides owners a chance to reunite with their stray or confiscated pets, CACC still faces several challenges.

• CACC is significantly understaffed. According to the National Animal Control Association guidelines for minimum daily time spent cleaning and feeding animals, CACC was understaffed by 29.5%, or 303 staffing hours, at the time of the audit.

• 38% of neglected and abused animals under CACC care did not receive veterinary examinations within 24 hours of arrival as required by CACC policy.

• 5 animals were incorrectly shown in CACC’s Chameleon data system as still housed at the facility, though they had actually been adopted more than a month prior to the audit.

“Managing the City’s animal shelters can be difficult and thankless work,” said Inspector General Joe Ferguson. “CACC’s mandated mission of humanely handling and caring for the City’s lost, stray, and impounded animals cannot be achieved unless it uses all of the resources at its disposal. This includes ensuring it is fully staffed to meet both national industry standards and its legal responsibilities.”

The IGO made several recommendations for the CACC to improve its operations, including:

• After finding that 5 animals were incorrectly shown in CACC’s data system as still housed at the facility even though they’d been adopted more than a month prior, the IGO recommended that CACC design and implement procedures to ensure adoption records are better input into the CACC data system. The IGO also recommended that CACC ensure staff follow up on all animals listed as missing during inventory.

• After noting that CACC faced significant shortfalls among its cleaning and feeding staff, the IGO recommended that the department work to fill those vacancies as soon as possible. Further, the IGO recommended that CACC routinely evaluate whether it is meeting appropriate guidelines for time spent cleaning and feeding animals, and to determine the more appropriate staffing strategies (hourly workers, salaried employees, and volunteers) to ensure those guidelines are met.

The USAO press release and criminal complaint can be read via the links on the right of your screen.

1) had effective grant monitoring policies and procedures; and,
2) whether reimbursements to grantees were properly made and recorded.

Based upon the audit’s results, the IGO determined that grant monitoring processes were generally effective. However, the IGO found deficiencies arising from DFSS’s misunderstanding of segregation of duties and governmental auditing reporting standards, insufficient management oversight, and ineffective grant close-out procedures. At that time, DFSS responded with corrective actions it planned to take.

In March 2013, the IGO inquired with DFSS regarding the current status of those corrective actions. DFSS responded on April 8, 2013. The IGO has summarized the five original audit findings, recommendations, and status of corrective actions in the report linked on the right.

City law mandates that the Quarterly include certain statistics about the number, type, and duration of IGO investigations. However, to promote further transparency into IGO operations, the Inspector General ensures that the quarterly report includes summaries of concluded investigations resulting in disciplinary findings and recommendations. The report also includes summaries of IGO audits, reports, and other recommendations it transmitted to the City during the prior three month period.

Of particular concern to the IGO this quarter was the Illinois Supreme Court’s decision in Ferguson v. Patton.

“Earlier this quarter, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that this office cannot enforce its own subpoenas,” said Inspector General Joseph Ferguson. “Despite that limitation in our authority, and the Mayor’s refusal to either remedy that limitation or ensure the IGO has unfettered access to the documents and records we need to do our job, I am confident that IGO auditors, investigators, and attorneys will continue to take their work as far as they are able.”

Investigative highlights from the report include:

 The IGO determined that a police officer had used his/her official assignment serving building violation court summonses for the City Law Department to generate business for a friend’s private company that remediated the very same type of violations. However, despite agreeing that the misconduct likely occurred, the Chicago Police Department (CPD) declined to pursue any disciplinary action, citing purported procedural errors in the manner the IGO administered the officer’s procedural guarantees. In short, the officer did not face any disciplinary charges because CPD and the Law Department do not distinguish official IGO investigations of police officers from complaints made by citizens.

 The IGO conducted an investigation that revealed that four current or former City of Chicago Department of Public Health (CDPH) employees embezzled City-purchased Jewel and Target gift cards that were supposed to be used to buy food and health-care items for CDPH clients and their newborns, or given out to clients as an incentive to obtain medical treatment. Instead, the CDPH employees redeemed the cards for their own personal use.

 The IGO conducted an investigation that revealed that in the Spring of 2009, a former Department of Procurement Services (DPS) contracts compliance coordinator promoted and approved a minority-owned/woman-owned/disadvantaged business enterprise (M/W/DBE) pass-through scheme. In this case, a contractor for several O’Hare and Midway Residential Sound Insulation Program (RSIP) contracts purchased windows from non-M/W/DBE suppliers, but used M/W/DBE subcontractors as unnecessary middle-men in those transactions to inappropriately obtain M/W/DBE credit.

 An IGO investigation determined that an Animal Control Officer with the Commission on Animal Care and Control (ACC) repeatedly falsified work logs and timekeeping records to conceal the fact that he was routinely trapping stray cats and relinquishing them directly to a private shelter, rather than impounding them at ACC as required by ACC policy.

FORENSIC AUDIT INVESTIGATOR (Inspector General’s Office)

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS:

Graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s degree in Accounting, Finance or related degree, including three years of experience in financial auditing and/or investigations, or an equivalent combination of training and experience. A valid State of Illinois driver’s license is required at the time of employment.

PREFERRED QUALIFICATIONS:

• Three years’ experience conducting forensic accounting investigations into alleged accounting fraud and/or illegal acts by employees and/or officials of public sector and private sector organizations
• Availability to work any duty watch.

NOTE: RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT: An applicant must be an actual resident of the City of Chicago. Proof of residency will be required at the time of employment.

NOTE: APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED BY THE INDIVIDUAL APPLYING. NO SECOND PARTY APPLICATIONS WILL BE ACCEPTED.  THE INSPECTOR GENERAL’S OFFICE REQUIRES THAT ITS EMPLOYEES BE NONPARTISAN AND FREE FROM CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

ANNUAL SALARY:

Commensurate With Experience

Up to $66,180

 DUTIES:

• Conducts comprehensive analysis of financial automated accounting systems and manual fiscal records including ledgers, invoices and contracts
• Collects and evaluates financial evidence in order to establish the nature and extent of alleged improprieties
• Interviews managers, witnesses and subjects to obtain evidence of alleged wrongdoings
• Prepares written reports detailing investigation findings
• Testifies in state and federal criminal and civil court proceedings and before administrative hearings regarding results of investigations
• Ensures collected physical evidence is preserved, inventoried and archived according to operating standards
• Collaborates with IGO and state and federal investigators and agents in obtaining and analyzing financial records
• Collaborates with the Audit and Program Review section in the conduct of performance audits and program reviews
• Locates, recovers, and analyzes electronically-stored information such as bank records, while preserving its evidentiary value
• Develops proactive investigations based on intelligence derived from investigative activities and analysis of information in other investigations.

INSTRUCTIONS:
To apply for this job title do NOT use the City of Chicago online application.
Follow these six steps:

1. Go to e-mail address jobs@chicagoinspectorgeneral.org;
2. In the subject line, type in the job title for which you are applying;
3. Complete, save and attach the “Inspector General Employment Application,” available here;
4. Attach your cover letter for this job title;
5. Attach your resume; and,
6. Attach a writing sample and college and/or graduate school transcripts.

NOTE: To be considered for this position you must provide all the information listed above.  If you fail to provide this information at the time you submit your application, your submission will be incomplete and you will not be considered for an interview.  Application materials will only be accepted by e-mail at jobs@chicagoinspectorgeneral.org. If there is more than one open position in which you are interested, you may apply for more than one title by submitting an individual e-mail for each title. Repeat instruction steps one through six with each e-mail.

THE CITY OF CHICAGO IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER

The original recommendations,and City response, can be found here.

Today, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the IGO does not have the statutory authority to enforce its own subpoenas. The Court’s opinion requires the IGO to go to the City’s Corporation Counsel to enforce its subpoenas. When the Corporation Counsel chooses not to, or has a conflict of interest, as the Court found to be the case here, the IGO’s only recourse is to appeal to the Mayor, even when the investigation involves or is directed at the Office of the Mayor.

The Court’s ruling has provided clarity around an integral legal question concerning the operation and authority of the City’s Office of Inspector General. The ruling provides stark reminder that the City of Chicago does not have a structurally independent Inspector General. In addition to the prohibitions on enforcing subpoenas, the office’s budget is not protected. Its ability to fill staff vacancies must be approved by City Hall. It cannot allocate or re-allocate appropriated funds without going through a laborious series of City Hall checks and sign-offs first. In conducting inquiries and investigations into misconduct, fraud, waste, and inefficiency in City government, it is supposed to have access to all City records. With today’s ruling, the public and the City Council should now know that the IGO has access only to the records and materials the Mayor and his Corporation Counsel wishes to make available, when they decide to make them available.

This office does not seek special authority or treatment. The IGO ordinance is a promise by the City to ensure effective government oversight, and this office seeks only the baseline standards and authority for that to occur. The elected officials of this City and the public they serve need not look far to find that standard. It operates everywhere across the federal government, where it has been long settled that, among other things, an inspector general must have complete access to documents and records under its jurisdiction and the power to enforce its own subpoenas. But not in Chicago – not in this office, nor the Legislative Inspector General’s Office, nor the IGs for any of the so-called sister agencies, including the Chicago Public Schools, the Chicago Park District, the Public Building Commission, and City Colleges.

As a candidate, Mayor Emanuel pledged comprehensive ethics reform which included specific structural reforms respecting the power, authority, and independence of this office. Today’s Supreme Court ruling made it clear that such reforms can only come about in the form of action by the City Council. In my capacity as Inspector General, I now ask the Mayor to introduce and support an ordinance that would codify the pledges he made as a candidate.

At a minimum, I ask that:

1) The Mayor protect the IGO budget from political pressure by setting it at no less than 0.1 percent of the overall City budget, and ensure the Inspector General have full discretion over how to use that money;
2) the Mayor ensure unrestricted IGO access to all City documents and records; and,
3) the Mayor ensure the IGO’s ability to enforce its own subpoenas.

Finally, I formally ask that the Mayor to direct the Corporation Counsel to comply with the IGO’s subpoena in the underlying investigation of this case. In doing so, I ask that he consider the Court’s finding that the Corporation Counsel has a conflict of interest in the case.

In the meantime, Chicago residents and taxpayers need to know this office’s jurisdictional limitations and what that can mean for our operations, be they investigations, audits, or oversight of the City’s employment practices governed by the Shakman accords. They deserve better.