The Vander Weele Group Website
Vander Weele Group
773-929-3030
  • Home
  • What We Do
    • Fiscal Monitoring >
      • Risk Assessments
    • Programmatic Monitoring
    • Investigative Services >
      • Investigations
      • Investigative Strategy
      • Data Analytics
      • Intelligence
  • Who We Serve
    • Education
    • Government
  • Who We Are
    • What We've Done
    • How to Find Us
    • Certifications and Codes
  • Resources
    • Bootcamp >
      • Grants Compliance
      • Fraud Waste and Abuse
    • Uniform Guidance
  • Blog

Blog

Audits Failed to Detect nearly $700,000 of Fraud in Charter School

4/19/2019

0 Comments

 
​New Mexico State Auditor, Tim Keller, states that the allegations against a charter school manager for mishandling $700,000 indicate a larger pattern of poor oversight. According to Keller’s investigation, Julieanne Maestas, La Promesa’s former assistant business manager, diverted more than $475,000 from La Promesa into her personal bank account from June 2010 to July 2016. In addition, she deposited about $177,000 worth of checks that were payable to the former executive director – her mother, Albuquerque Public Schools board member Analee Maestas – as well as to her boyfriend, who was a school maintenance vendor. The La Promesa Early Learning Center was audited annually, but the audits did not discover any evidence of fraud or embezzlement throughout the six years of alleged mishandling. 
0 Comments

New GAO Report: Federal Agencies reported $8.8 billion in Fraud Last Year

4/19/2019

0 Comments

 
​In Fiscal Year 2017, federal agencies reported $8.8 billion in confirmed fraud, according to a new report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office.  The GAO report looks at progress made by federal agencies and OMB to reduce fraud risks since Congress enacted the Fraud Reduction and Data Analytics Act of 2015 (FRDAA). That Act requires agencies to establish financial and administrative controls for managing fraud risks, creating a Fraud Risk Framework in the process.

One leading practice described in the Fraud Risk Framework is using the results of monitoring, evaluation, audits, and investigations to improve fraud prevention, detection, and response. In its new report, the GAO said that about 86 percent of agencies indicated that they use results of monitoring, evaluation, audits, and investigations to manage fraud risk, but only 54 percent did so on a regular basis.

​The federal agencies’ reports of their fraud risk management activities is illustrated below:
Picture
Areas of risk include grant fraud, defined as when award recipients attempt to deceive the government about their spending of award money outside the parameters of the grant. Other high risk areas described in the report are payroll, beneficiary payments, large contracts, and purchase and travel cards.

​Click here to read more
0 Comments

Signs of a Compromised Organization

4/19/2019

0 Comments

 
Maintaining integrity should be a key goal of educational leadership. One scandal can mar a system’s reputation irreparably and derail its mission. Knowing the signs of a compromised organization can help school board members reduce risks to reputation. This is more important as the educational landscape becomes increasingly competitive, and families find more options. 
One red flag is the deafening silence of underlings in the presence of their supervisors, particularly when questions are directed at them. Employees who don’t speak up are often afraid of retribution. While effective school board members know that day-to-day management should be left to the school leader, they shouldn’t shy away from speaking with staff at every level. Such information is critical for effective oversight. Beware of supervisors who prohibit that.
​

To learn the signs of a compromised organization click here
Picture
0 Comments

The 'Varsity Blues' Scandal: Why Elite Colleges have always been 'Pay to Play'

4/12/2019

0 Comments

 
By Emily Richmond of the Education Writer's Association
Picture
The details of bribery and corruption involving some of the nation’s most elite colleges unveiled in the “Operation Varsity Blues” admissions scandal are jaw-dropping. But the underlying premise — that wealth can buy entry to prestigious  universities – has been a subject of many journalistic investigations over recent decades.
Journalists throughout the U.S. quickly investigated the latest scandal while also weaving into their coverage the long history and troubling socioeconomic implications.
​They noted that the U.S. Department of Justice’s largest-ever college admissions prosecution pulls back the curtain on a process that calls into question the idea that America is a meritocracy. (For more, take a look at The Hechinger Report’s Divided We Learn project.)
The indictments allege that rich and famous parents paid college admissions consultant William “Rick” Singer at least $25 million to ensure their children landed coveted seats at Stanford, Yale, the University of Southern California, the University of Texas and other selective colleges. ​Singer has already pleaded guilty, according to federal authorities.

Click here to read the full article. 
0 Comments

How Auditors Get it Wrong on Risk Assessments for Monitoring

4/1/2019

0 Comments

 
There’s an old saying that To a Hammer, Everything Looks Like a Nail. To an auditor,
​everything can look like an audit—even when it’s not an audit, but a subrecipient monitoring review.
​​​Although there is overlap, auditing and subrecipient monitoring are distinctly different professions governed by different rules. When it comes to risk assessments, this is especially important. That’s because Single Audits—required of agencies accepting federal funds—and other audits routinely find that pass-through entities “violate” risk assessment procedures in determining what organizations to monitor. This results in the dreaded audit finding.
Picture
​​For example, one state’s Single Audit found that the pass-through entity improperly determined that subrecipients were low risk despite negative publicity and significant leadership turnover. Auditors disagreed with the pass-through entity that only subrecipients who distribute grants are high risk.
Read More
0 Comments

    About

    Our mission is to deliver meaningful oversight solutions for large-scale programs serving vulnerable populations such as children, seniors, people with disabilities,  and victims of crime.  

    Archives

    February 2020
    May 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    September 2017

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Vander Weele GroupLLC

​Chicago Office

4725 N. Sheridan Road, 1-S
Chicago, IL 60640
Phone: 773-929-3030
Fax: 872-806-0436

Springfield Office

975 S. Durkin Drive Unit 204
Springfield, IL 62704
​Phone: 217-503-4949
​Fax: 217-503-4955

South Holland Office​

​16103 LaSalle Street
South Holland, IL 60473
Phone: 708-584-0367
​Fax: 708-713-4342

Certifications:

HUBZone, WOSB, WBENC, DBE,
​and ​WBE

IL 117.001231 / 118.000306
Vander Weele Group, LLC. Copyright 2020
  • Home
  • What We Do
    • Fiscal Monitoring >
      • Risk Assessments
    • Programmatic Monitoring
    • Investigative Services >
      • Investigations
      • Investigative Strategy
      • Data Analytics
      • Intelligence
  • Who We Serve
    • Education
    • Government
  • Who We Are
    • What We've Done
    • How to Find Us
    • Certifications and Codes
  • Resources
    • Bootcamp >
      • Grants Compliance
      • Fraud Waste and Abuse
    • Uniform Guidance
  • Blog