Is this how things are going to come to light? Are we going to read more stories like this, dumped out one at a time, in Summer Saturday newspaper editions when readership is at its lightest and attention spans at their shortest?
This is a big story. The NJ State Auditor’s office conducted an audit of certain programs in Fiscal Years 2008 and 2009 operated by the Board of Education and found significant problems; namely The Home Instruction Program. This program spent nearly $2 Million over that time span, making payments to around 85 instructors/tutors to teach students, in the words of the report, “at a student’s home or other suitable setting when certain health conditions, legal violations, court orders, or suspensions occur.” In addition, certain students with disabilities who have not yet been or who cannot be placed in appropriate classes may be taught at home.
The report, which can be found here, describes how examinations of billing from the busiest 10 of those 85 instructors showed that of the total $738,000 billed by those instructors, $321,000 of payments were described as “questionable.” Questionable due to such things as two instructors billing for the same student at the same time; instructors billing the same time periods for two students; overlapping timecards. The auditors could not even find timecards for another $112,000 in payments made to those 10 instructors. So, for the 10 instructors examined, “questionable” payments and payments without timecards account for nearly 59% of the total billing to those individuals. No wonder the Auditor states that “certain questionable items will be referred to the State’s Division of Criminal Justice.”
No kidding.
The report also states that for the 136 students who received home instruction from those 10 teachers over those two years, there was no documentation on file for 66 of those students – nearly half – to substantiate that those students were even properly eligible to receive home instruction.
The report describes the results of other tests and examinations done of the Board’s books and programs, including student attendance records, inventory control, accounting practices and building renovation oversight . It is depressing reading, with words and phrases such as “questionable,” “ineffective,” “violation,” “objectives…not clearly communicated and achievements were not measured.”
All this comes to light some 4 months after a state fiscal monitor was appointed by the State to oversee fiscal operations of the Trenton School District. This report, clearly limited in scope, shows for all to see what a mess of things the Trenton Board of Ed has made. It surely seems that more revelations are in store. The State Auditor, the Department of Education — and perhaps the Division of Criminal Justice — will undoubtedly have more to say on these, and other matters. We will probably be reading more stories like this, drip by drip in Saturday newspapers over the next weeks and months.
Before that point, I hope that we see hear some explanations from the Board of Ed, the Superintendent and the Mayor. I also want these explanations accompanied with resignations and dismissals, not least among the leadership of the District and the Board who served during this time and who bear direct responsibility for these failures.
We read this report as the result of state oversight of our school district in place since spring. Who knows what kind of items would be found in City Hall if a similar examination of our financial records were to be conducted?
We need an audit.