Today is the money edition of the HBCU Digest, and I hope that these stories motivate you to consider supporting the publication with a monthly or annual subscription.
Your business helps to defray production costs, give new writers a chance to be paid for their work, supports the annual HBCU Awards ceremony, and helps to keep me in good standing as an income-earning husband and father of four.
Do it for the babies.
— JCS
Details Emerge in Texas Southern Admissions Scandal
A freedom of information request from The Chronicle of Higher Education has yielded a scandalous overview of the ambiguous admission scandal which was made public late last year, and which ultimately may have led to the firing of former TSU President Austin Lane last month.
The story recaps results from an internal investigation led by the school, which was forced by a court order to give the report to the Chronicle. The document shows that Lane failed to report issues of potential bribery and fraudulent admission and enrollment practices at the school, leading to his termination and eventual separation settlement with the university.
Before (former TSU assistant director of admission and financial aid Edward W.) René left Texas Southern, the university found $13,456.25 stashed under his desk calendar in his office, in the form of cashier’s checks and money orders, according to the investigation.
More than $95,000, including law-school application fees and seat deposits, seemed to have been improperly deposited into the university’s foundation — outside of Texas Southern’s direct control — and not into a university account.
And, at least in October, investigators believed that an unknown balance, ranging from $14,660 to $31,600, was “unaccounted for.” Investigators said René did not provide a detailed financial report when asked.
A spokesman and the university’s law-school dean did not respond to questions about whether the money held by the foundation had moved to the university’s direct oversight, exactly how much money was unaccounted for, and whether the university had tracked down those funds.
The interesting part about this report is that Lane, in his response to the Board of Regents’ termination letter, outlines that a board-approved policy of investigating and managing fraud within the university falls under the purview of the president and that there was no obligation to report the matter to the regents.
In August 2016 (first two months on the job), I, along with the Chief Audit Executive (internal auditor) and Associate VP of Human Resources submitted the proposed Fraud Policy as an update to the Texas Southern University (MAPPS) Manual of Administrative Policies and Procedures (Policy 02.05.06) to the board of regents for approval. It was approved August 2016 during a regularly scheduled board meeting.
Section III (a) of the policy defines management as vice presidents, directors, managers and supervisors. It goes on to state that (b) management (not board of regents) is responsible for detecting fraudulent, dishonest or improper activities in their area of responsibility.
The assistant dean of admissions reports and falls under the responsibility of the dean of the law school, not president or provost. Section III. (g) goes onto state, “When fraud or a dishonest or improper activity is detected or suspected, management should immediately contact the university department of public safety if the situation warrants such action, for example, if obvious theft has taken place, security is at risk, or immediate recovery is possible. In addition, management should immediately contact the University’s Office of Internal Audit and Fraud. Since this employee reported to the dean of the law school and was in her area of responsibility, she sought approval from myself and provost to notify and engage the internal auditor regarding allegations relating to admissions practices in the law school.
It raises a very unique question for higher education; where are the lines between the president’s exclusive oversight of the university and the board’s shared responsibility for the same? Many schools, historically black and predominantly white, struggle with this distinction. Accreditation guidelines, like those found in the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools’ Commission on Colleges’ Principles of Accreditation, try to give general guardrails to both sides in sections four and five on covering governing board and chief executive officer responsibilities.
The principles do not provide specifics on which executive party oversees and executes which matters; they rely on SACSCOC member schools to use their mission and their vision for presidents and board members to decide how to jointly or independently manage institutional affairs.
But politics, money (or lack thereof) and exposure have made this task impossible for some campuses, and some leaders both in presidencies and in board seats take their positions as licenses to grandstand, to exert authority, and to control public opinion.
Ideally, we want boards and presidents to be in constant contact about major university matters like fundraising cultivation, legislative engagement, campus crime, accreditation, extreme and imminent physical plant issues, and enrollment trends. Outside of that list, every other matter raised or demanded for board consideration is a cement mixer of egos, experiences, and lack of higher ed administrative insight, waiting to churn up executive relationships and harden collegiality at the highest levels of administration.
In Texas Southern’s case, there is a legal argument to be effectively made on both sides of the question. But the common-sense test says that Lane should’ve told the board that an employee was hiding hundreds of thousands of dollars in a campus office and that its law school had an issue with fraudulent admissions.
Now Walter Kimbrough’s rant looks less than informed, some alumni still aren’t satisfied with the board’s decision, and the Chronicle gets to sell dozens of subscriptions off of a juicy HBCU investigative piece — all because there is no simple answer to the complex question of what do boards really need to know.
North Carolina A&T Names College of Business and Economics for Alumnus, Philanthropist Willie A. Deese
North Carolina A&T State University made history last week, dedicating for the first time one of its colleges in honor of acclaimed executive and philanthropist Willie A. Deese.
One of the highest-ranking black pharmaceutical executives in the world, Deese has donated nearly $10 million to his alma mater, and currently co-chairs the university’s $90 million capital campaign.
I spoke with Deese recently about his giving and his view of how HBCUs can follow North Carolina A&T’s lead in engaging high-level corporate support from individuals and companies.
Letter to the Editor: UNCF’s ‘State of the HBCU’ Was Anything But
The so-called United Negro College Fund’ “State of the HBCU” on yesterday missed the mark! The tone and substance of the address was surprising and a great disappointment for the following reasons.
First UNCF is not the anointed “King of the HBCU community.” Rather, UNCF’s mission is supposed to focus on fundraising for its 37 members and not on chasing “federal ambulances.” What happened to the private sector funds raised by UNCF for the period they referenced yesterday?
Second, the so-called Hall of Fame for Congressional Representatives left off several key members of Congress who have supported HBCUs, including Senator Roy Blount (R-Missouri), Chair of Senate Appropriations, and an important supporter of Missouri’s two HBCUs, Harris Stowe State, and Lincoln Universities. Also omitted from the recognition list was Representative Bradley Byrne (R-NC) member of the bi-partisan HBCU Caucus, and Representative French Hill (R-AK); both staunch supporters of HBCUs.
Third and perhaps most egregious of all was the lack of appreciation and expression of thanks to the Trump Administration for their tireless work since 2017 in support of HBCUs. The administration signed and implemented E.O. 13779, which for the first time gives the Executive Director of the WHI on HBCUs a seat on the Domestic Policy Council in the Executive Office of the President where policy decisions are developed for presidential consideration. This resulted in the approval of $322 million in loan forgiveness approved by POTUS for Xavier, Dillard, Tougaloo, and Southern University at New Orleans. Additionally, the 2019 Farm Bill provides new mandatory $40 million to the HBCU 1890 land grants for the first time in history.
The UNCF “address” said nothing about the key members of the Administration’s outstanding and dedicated team who have worked tirelessly to move the HBCU agenda forward. The members of the team include Johnathan Holifield, Executive Director of the WHI on HBCUs and member of the Domestic Policy Council, Ja’Ron Smith, Deputy Assistant to the President, Johnny Taylor, Chairman of the President’s Board of Advisors for the WHI on HBCUs, and Leonard Haynes, Senior Advisor, Office of the Undersecretary at the Department of Education.
No other Administration has ever had a “team” devoted to HBCU issues like these four distinguished men. Without the work of this critical “team,” the accomplishments cited by UNCF President and CEO Michael Lomax would not have happened.
In the words of William Cullen Bryant, “Truth crushed to earth shall rise again!”
Samuel T. Rhoades is a 1967 and 1973 graduate of North Carolina Central University.
Morehouse ‘A Candle in the Dark’ Gala Raises More than $4 Million
Morehouse College continued its recent impressive run of attracting high-level philanthropy last month, with its annual ‘A Candle in the Dark’ gala drawing more than $4 million in support for the institution.
During the festivities, Morehouse College President David A. Thomas thanked honorees for their commitment to excellence and reminded Gala guests that Morehouse is also focused on producing outstanding leaders and scholars. The College is a top producer of Rhodes and Fulbright Scholars, and is among the first HBCU to offer a degree in software engineering.
“Philanthropists are taking note of the excellence at Morehouse,” Thomas said. “I believe that the future at Morehouse can be even brighter than our illustrious past.”
Organizers say this year’s event drew more than $1.5 million in sponsorship and ticket sales and has grossed more than $6 million over the last two years.
