School Board Good Governance

The school board has two functions:

• oversight of education policy and function
• ensuring the efficient and ethical disbursement of taxpayer money

Issues that can interfere with this second function include fraud, cronyism, waste and nepotism. Some of these potential problems are more easily addressed than others.

Outright fraud can typically be detected by a forensic audit. Such audits can also detect cronyism and waste, although less reliably. There has been at least one instance of outright fraud affecting the school district. This was detected by an amateur district resident who conducted the equivalent of a forensic audit via the Freedom of Information Act. This particular case significantly damaged the district’s reputation because the press tied it to a more extreme case of fraud in the Roslyn school district. It is obviously preferable for the district to police its own financial affairs rather than rely on amateurs.

We will be advocating for the district to conduct a forensic audit using an external firm without ties to the district. Such a request should not be interpreted as an allegation or evidence of fraud, instead it is part of our broader goal to more firmly establish principles of good governance within the district.

Nepotism is relatively straightforward to deal with. There are already effective nepotism laws governing school boards in many states. In New York State, some school boards have adopted strict anti-nepotism by-laws. We will be advocating for our school board to adopt strict anti-nepotism by-laws.

The broader issue here is conflict of interest. A focus on good governance is designed to ensure that the children’s interests and rights are protected.

Forensic Audits

Normal financial audits evaluate an organization’s financial statements to determine if they fairly represent its financial standing. They are not intended to detect fraud, cronyism or waste and, as shown by the Roslyn case, cannot typically do so.

Forensic audits are expensive and cannot be done on a yearly basis. A phased approach with an assessment of the highest areas of risk for fraud or misuse can limit the expense. Every publicly funded institution should undergo such an audit on a semi-regular basis.

Examples of the outcomes of such audits for school boards can be found here:

• WCCUSD forensic audit
• Phoenixville forensic audit

Anti-Nepotism Laws

Examples of state level anti-nepotism laws can be found here:

• New Jersey laws
• Texas laws

NYS law is less clear on nepotism and this is where local autonomy can make a difference to ensure good governance, which is why we will be advocating for our school board to adopt strict anti-nepotism by-laws.