Colleagues,
As you know, the university currently is participating with federal agencies on an investigation at our College of Education and Human Development.
Because this is an ongoing investigation, we cannot discuss specifics of the case. Frankly, we are frustrated that we are unable to share information about investigations that often is leaked to members of the media.
However, the investigation and the accompanying feedback we’ve received from faculty and staff have brought forward several issues that we feel we need to address.
First, we feel it is important to emphasize our support for the faculty and staff of the College of Education and Human Development. We firmly believe the success of the College resulted from the entire team, including the leadership, the faculty, the staff and students, and the team deserves our support.
During the past five years, the College has grown and improved in many ways as evidenced by its graduate programs rising from outside the top 100 to 56th in U.S. News and World Report; its inclusion as one of 20 schools nationally participating in a Carnegie Foundation project to create a new doctorate in professional practice; an increase in grants and contracts from $4.2 million in 2003 to more than $40 million; and better relationships with the Jefferson County Public Schools and other local school systems. We are proud of our successes.
Second, some media have second-guessed rumored early-warning signs, as evidenced by the “numerous grievances” filed against Dean Felner. To correct the context - one that has not been reported even though we’ve given this information to the media - only four grievances were filed against Dean Felner during his five-year tenure. In each case, those grievances followed the appropriate University process. For instance, a faculty grievance is an independent faculty-driven procedure usually facilitated by a legal professional. In no case was a recommendation for further action submitted to the Provost.
Third, we have received questions about our policies and procedures regarding grants and contracts. As we have moved through the last few weeks, our own questioning has not yielded weaknesses in our processes or procedures, or in our implementation of them. Indeed, we have great confidence in our Office of Audit Services and the routine reviews and monitoring they conduct on our internal control structure. Also, as you are aware, a review of our internal control structure is required by the Federal government for recipients of Federal funds in excess of $500,000. These past reviews of our internal control structures have revealed no weaknesses.
That being said, we will immediately do three things.
First, we will soon announce the hiring of an independent third party auditing firm to review our grant oversight processes and implementation, and to suggest improvements.
Second, we have asked our Office of Audit Services to review the financial records of CEHD.
Third, we will ask the chair of our Faculty Senate to review our grievance process so that those who believe university policies have been violated will feel comfortable
bringing their concerns forward through approved and sanctioned university
procedures.We will continue to keep you informed the best we can within the legal constraints that have been placed upon us regarding this ongoing investigation. Be assured, we take the grievance process seriously (in fact, we already had committed to strengthen the grievance process with regard to staff as a result of concerns raised by the Staff Senate.) We remain firmly committed to financial integrity and accountability and will take whatever measures are warranted as a result of the upcoming independent review of our internal control structure.
James R. Ramsey, President
Shirley C. Willihnganz, Executive Vice President and Provost
Hummmm. Just wondering, but...
Is it a leak when folks on campus see the vans back up to the College of Education and agents start carting off records and computers?
Is an Open Records request a leak?
Can Ramsey and Willihnganz count? I'm fairly certain I saw at least 31 complaints against Felner.
Are they suggesting these were not "grievances." Since most folks are reluctant to sign complaints against superordinate bullies, for all of the obvious reasons, doesn't that kind of grievance process only serve the superior? That's why groups like the OEA investigate all complaints - signed or otherwise. It's the only way to get to the bottom of such situations.
The media is accused of "second-guessing" the early warning signs about Felner. But, doesn't that require that someone "first-guessed" them? It's hard to see where that happened. Willihnganz seems to be where harassment complaints go to die. It seems clear that absent the federal investigation, we wouldn't be "guessing" them now.
Since the on-going investigation pertains to the illegal misuse of grant funds and not the university's lack of an effective grievance process, why doesn't Ramsey speak out about that? Tell the university community how well it works for those not in power.
Ramsey can be forgiven for wanting to parse the number of "official grievances." It looks bad to have 33 complaints on record against one's cash cow. But Willihnganz knew how many times she had to make excuses for Felner. Let's count them together shall we?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31...
More?
Meanwhile, C-J's Bob Hill wants a government grant to create The Hill Center for the Prevention of Education. He's only going to hire a travel agent.
No comments:
Post a Comment