NEWS
- Auditor: D.C. school system’s capital program lacks accountability
- Report describes DCPS school modernization program as out of control
- Audit: School Modernization Agencies Broke Rules, Didn’t Keep Track of Money
- D.C. Council Questions Progress on Truancy Reforms
Auditor: D.C. school system’s capital program lacks accountability
The Washington Post
By Michael Alison Chandler
July 1, 2015
The District government has failed to adequately monitor its school modernization program, leading to violations of multiple laws designed to improve transparency and accountability, according to a report being released Wednesday by the Office of the District of Columbia Auditor.
The report, covering fiscal years 2010 through 2013 and $1.2 billion in spending, found that the Department of General Services and D.C. Public Schools did not provide basic financial management, allowing for the misuse of taxpayer funds.
“Across the city, public school students are benefiting from modern, new facilities, and there is much to commend in the priority given to school construction,” said D.C. Auditor Kathy Patterson. “But District resources are finite. We owe it to taxpayers to see that modernization funds are spent well and prudently, to assure our ability to complete the task of upgrading all of our schools.”
The capital program came under new scrutiny this year after dozens of school projects were pushed back in the renovation queue in Mayor Muriel E. Bowser’s $1.3 billion, six-year school construction plan. The changes were the result of major cost overruns and a slowdown in capital spending as the city prepares to pay down what amounts to a major debt load after several years of aggressive borrowing.
In a letter responding to the report, Jonathan Kayne, interim director of the Department of General Services, said there are shortcomings, but he also defended the program’s accomplishments.
“While DGS acknowledges the need for immediate corrective action to improve the school modernization program, the program has numerous successes that have contributed to the quality of our infrastructure and education, and even the quality of life more broadly for District residents,” Kayne wrote.
The agency plans to provide a more complete response at a D.C. Council oversight hearing scheduled for July 8.
The council passed the School Modernization Financing Act in 2006 to begin updating the city’s aging school facilities after years of complaints, litigation and widespread fire code violations.
In its early years, the program was managed by D.C. Public Schools through the Office of Public Education Facilities Modernization. In 2011, DGS assumed oversight and management of the building plans.
Since 2007, the city has paid two D.C. contractors as part of a partnership to perform the day-to-day management of each construction project.
The firm received $37 million in management fees during the four years, but the city provided only “limited supervision” of the work, the report says.
Specifically, it found that DGS did not ensure that contractors adhered to the terms of their contracts, including sharing any savings during projects with the District. The report cites inaccurate accounting of the total costs of each school’s modernization spending, and in many cases, the city kept limited documents to justify cost reports. The report found 75 payments for which DGS had charged expenditures to the wrong school project, representing nearly $14 million.
And the auditor found that approximately $45,000 meant for schools was spent on parks.
To guide funding decisions, the school modernization law required the mayor to develop and maintain a Master Facilities Plan, assessing the condition of each school building, capacity and any recommendations for consolidation or closure, as well as a capital improvement plan with a school-by-school breakdown of proposed spending.
Two master plans were developed in 2010 and 2013, but the report calls it a “largely inconsequential document” that did not reflect the actual selection of schools for modernization. In early years, the capital plan did not include school-by-school funding allocations.
“It has proven difficult, if not impossible, to determine how, when, why, and by whom schools are selected for modernization,” the report says.
The law also called for an 11-member “Modernization Advisory Committee” that would provide oversight and monitor spending, but the committee stopped meeting in 2008 after members said they failed to get staff support from the D.C. Council.
Cost overruns have been a consistent problem. The 2010 Master Facilities Plan included cost standards for modernizations, with budgets expected to fall in the range of $210 to $255 per square foot. But five high school projects reviewed ranged between $259 per square foot at Eastern High and $348 per square foot at Woodson. Projected costs for ongoing projects are higher: Roosevelt’s upgraded facility, scheduled to open in 2016, is expected to cost more than $400 per square foot; Duke Ellington School of the Arts is expected to cost more than $1,000 per square foot.
The law also called for an annual audit, but just two have been conducted in nine years. The last audit, in 2011, had similar findings, including poor systems for oversight, inaccurate vendor payments and spotty bookkeeping.
The next audit — for fiscal 2014 — is getting underway and is expected to include an investigation of the cost increases at Duke Ellington.
The authors of the report said they hope to provide constructive feedback so the city can “right the ship of school modernization.”
Report describes DCPS school modernization program as out of control
The Examiner
By Mark Lerner
July 1, 2015
A report being issued today by the Office of the District of Columbia Auditor has found numerous problems with the manner in which $2.1 billion in school modernization funds has been managed by the city's government. The program was initially administered by the Office of Public Education Facilities Modernization and by fiscal year 2011 was turned over to the Department of General Services. Quoting directly from the study:
- The District may have paid fraudulent or inaccurate invoices;
- Funds spent on unrelated projects reduced the amount of funds available for the modernization of schools;
- The total cost to build each school is not accurate;
- Contractors and subcontractors may not be paying their laborers the local prevailing wage as required by the Davis Bacon Act; and
- The District cannot consistently demonstrate that its contractors and subcontractors have been paid in full and on time.
Reading through the 95 pages it is incredible to see how many records requested by the city's auditor Kathy Patterson were just not available for review. In addition, as the Washington Post's Michael Allison Chandler explains, the modernization program was by law to have a financial audit completed annually. However, in nine years only two have been performed.
Equally troubling is the amount of public funds spent on school renovations per square foot. The report lists the construction work at Woodson High School at $348 per square foot, the spending at Anacostia High School at $294 per square foot, the renovation cost at Woodrow Wilson Senior High School at $303 per square foot, and the building at Roosevelt High School at over $400 per square foot. The cost to renovate the Duke Ellington School of the Arts is projected to cost over $1,000 a square foot.
These statistics compare shamefully to the money charter schools have available to spend on their school renovations, which generally run about $200 per square foot. In addition, the dollars for charter school construction projects must come from loans from banks that must be repaid.
It appears that to bring equity to this school modernization system charters must be included in future allocations of public funds. However, I'm sure the sector will not want to join until the program is being administered as recommended by the D.C. Auditor.
Audit: School Modernization Agencies Broke Rules, Didn’t Keep Track of Money
Washington Citypaper
By Will Sommer
July 1, 2015
The District agencies in charge of school modernization broke rules, spent money on the wrong projects, and couldn't account for millions in modernization spending, according to a new report from the D.C. Auditor.
The report arrives a week ahead of a joint D.C. Council hearing on the cost of school modernization since legislation passed in 2006 laid out the modernization plan.
For her part, Mayor Muriel Bowser has said she has "concerns" about how much renovations and new schools cost. According to the audit, Bowser's concerns are well-founded.
The Department of General Services staffer in charge of school modernization contracting, according to the audit, was unfamiliar with "basic terminology and accounting practices." Between the 2010 and 2013 fiscal years, when the District spent more than $1.2 billion on school modernization, auditors couldn't find evidence that $168,997,484 worth of expenses had been approved. $44,945 meant for schools was instead on parks and recreation centers.
“The District may have paid fraudulent or inaccurate invoices," the audit reads.
While a private joint venture created to handle modernization contracting received $37 million from the District between 2010 and 2013, the audit questioned whether the money would have been better spent building an in-house contracting office at DGS. According to the report, DGS' oversight responsibility often only amounted to providing "the final signature" on payment approvals.
“It would appear that the District government has relinquished at least some of its responsibilities to its private contractors," the audit reads.
The District government has made the process of which school receive renovations just as opaque, according to the audit.
“It has proven difficult, if not impossible, to determine, when, why, and by whom schools are selected for modernization," the report reads.
Not that the schools selected for modernization get it quickly—or cheaply. The report lists Powell Elementary School and Duke Ellington School of the Arts as two examples of years-late modernization projects. Meanwhile, more than $2 million was spent at two schools that were then scheduled to be closed.
The audit also found other school modernizations running way over their expected outlays. In 2010, modernization estimates were put at between $210 and $255 per square foot. At Roosevelt Senior High School, though, modernization programs are expected to cost roughly $400 per square foot, while Duke Ellington will cost more than $1,000 per square foot.
D.C. Council Questions Progress on Truancy Reforms
Washington CityPaper
By Morgan Baskin
June 30, 2015
Jason Crocker was the first to testify at Monday afternoon’s joint roundtable on truancy reform initiatives.
“Mr. Grosso, you’ve said before that these meetings can be boring. So I won’t be boring,” Crocker said before launching into a two-minute impersonation of President Obama.
He called that alter ego “Bacrock Obama,” and the embarrassment—which stunned viewers in the packed hearing room into total silence—was an apt symbol for the three-hour-long meeting.
At-Large Councilmember David Grosso, who chairs the Council’s education committee, was frustrated with the lack of up-to-date analysis of existing truancy reform initiatives.
“How do we look at this and evaluate how all of these different programs are working, and how do we refine it if it’s not? Who do we give the money to and why?” Grosso asked. “I’m more and more convinced we can’t legislate our way to better attendance.”
During the 2013-2014 school year, 18 percent of DCPS students and 15 percent of charter students were “chronically truant,” according to a report by D.C. Lawyers for Youth, meaning they missed more than 10 days of school without an excuse. Fifty-six percent of DCPS high school students in the District were considered chronically truant during that period.
Despite reform initiatives instituted after the passage of a 2013 anti-truancy law, some District officials aren’t seeing the desired results.
After reaching 10 unexcused absences, the school must refer students to the Child and Family Services Agency, which then holds a disciplinary meeting with the student and his or her guardian. DCPS Chancellor Kaya Henderson says that system only turns students off to the idea of going to school: 46 percent of students who were referred to CFSA last year either did not re-enroll in school or were truant again, and 78 percent of students referred to the court for truancy did not re-enroll or were truant again. She says the “lion’s share” of those numbers probably reflect students who continue to be truant rather than those who don’t re-enroll (either because they decided to switch schools or drop out completely).
Thousands of high school students who missed more than 15 days of school last year were referred to court. But Daniel Okonkwo, executive director of D.C. Lawyers for Youth, told the councilmembers the court system is “fundamentally unequipped” to handle those numbers.
Also criticized was the contentious “80/20 rule,” which gives students who are more than 10 minutes late to their first class an unexcused absence for that period. Students who miss more than 20 percent of the school day are given an unexcused absence for the whole day. Okonkwo said it’s unfair to conflate chronic tardiness with chronic absenteeism.
“I feel like you’re identifying problems but criticizing us for not having solved those problems,” Council Chairman Phil Mendelson said to Okonkwo. “Which is what we’re trying to do, and at some schools the problem is overwhelming… The goal is not court prosecutions, but you have to have court at the end of the process as a stick while we try to improve the carrot.”
_________
FROM FOCUS
 |
Upcoming events
Click Here > |
__________