Richland 1 says it will train staff on ‘fiscal caution.’ But denies it mismanaged $31M
After increased financial scrutiny from the state Department of Education, Richland 1 says it is planning to better train its staff on procurement practices but denies mismanaging $31 million when it began building the Vince Ford Early Learning Center.
Richland 1 had already spent more than a year on “fiscal watch,” a state-designated status, after an audit by the state Education Department discovered improper use of procurement cards — or “p-cards.” In August, state education Superintendent Ellen Weaver informed the district that she had escalated that status following a critical report from the state Inspector General about the Ford center in Lower Richland.
“The finding of significant and unremedied procurement deficiencies require me to escalate your District to a declaration of Fiscal Caution,” Weaver wrote in an Aug. 2 letter to the district. Fiscal caution is the second highest level of financial and budgetary concern.
The district’s recovery plan, authored by Chief Financial Officer Sherri Matthews-Hazel and sent to the state Education Department Oct. 1, addressed some of the concerns in the Inspector General’s report. The report determined that while the district had not committed any criminal activity, it had broken state and local building and zoning codes and cost taxpayers more than $350,000 when it began construction on the early learning center without the proper permits. The report also found fault with the district’s policies regarding procurement and solicitation of services.
Richland 1’s recovery plan said that while it believes it was compliance with its own guidelines, it intends to implement training and professional development courses on procurement code, follow state requirements and update how procurement records are digitized and secured.
In response to the finding that the district had mismanaged $31 million for the Vince Ford Early Learning Center, the district said there was not “criminal activity or indication of fraudulent activity” and did not provide plans on how to rectify it.
Richland 1 also asked the Education Department for further clarification on the “non-procurement” matters that Weaver raised.
Aaron Bishop, chair of the Richland 1 school board, declined to comment. Several other members of the board could not be reached for comment.
Weaver now must decide whether to approve the district’s plan, and may order an audit. Officials with the state Department of Education said they have received the plan but did not provide additional comment. It is unclear when the agency will decide whether to approve the plan.
Weaver asked the Inspector General to investigate Richland 1 after the district failed to obtain permission from Richland County and the state Education Department before beginning construction on the Ford center on Caughman Road. After construction started, the Education Department said that because the center would serve children as young as infants, it could not be considered a school, which meant the Education Department couldn’t approve it. Richland One continued construction anyway, and the county issued a stop work order in January.
The state Department of Education first raised concerns about the district’s financial practices in 2022.
An audit that year found “significant deficiencies and material weaknesses” that could affect the financial well-being of the district, Molly Spearman, the then state superintendent of education, said.
“The District appreciates those identified opportunities to improve,” York said in a statement at the time. “However, in our opinion, none of the findings were significant or rose to material impact.”
Richland 1 attempted to appeal the department’s decision, but that appeal was denied.
York said the district already had “internal controls” to review transactions monthly, and those controls discovered issues with a former employee, which were turned over to law enforcement.
This story was originally published October 16, 2024 at 10:54 AM.
