When the Boss
Trumps
Internal Controls
What a difference
a hotline, a routine audit and
the right reporting chain could have made.
by Joseph T. Wells
hen a college was so broke it
couldnt even afford copy paper, toner and
other inexpensive supplies, it took some
sleuthing to find the reason. This article
summarizes the heroic efforts of one CPA, without
pay or outside staff (or experience in fraud
detection), who helped bring down a powerful and
arrogant college president.
Mary-Jo Kranacher,
CPA, was an adjunct professor in a large, urban
public university. One day after work she was
headed out of the building when a colleague,
clutching a sealed manila envelope, said in a low
voice, Mary-Jo, I need for you to see this
material. But not here, not on campus.
Kranacher took the
envelope home and carefully examined its
contents. She was shocked to see page after page
of purchase orders and vouchers she believed to
be clearly inappropriate expenses that had been
paid with the colleges funds: liquor
stores, personal credit card charges and
international travel, to name a few. Each and
every document had been authorized by the college
president, Regina (not her real name).
Regina had been
hired three years earlier with great fanfare and
support. But the honeymoon was short-lived; she
quickly developed a reputation as a ruthless
dictator who was fiscally irresponsible. Those
who dared to question her authority or decisions
found themselves on the street. The personnel
director, for instance, was fired while he was at
lunch. Upon his return he found the locks on his
office had been changed and his personal effects
unceremoniously dumped into boxes for him to tote
home. And that was just the beginning.
| |
The Freedom of
Information Act
and the Privacy ActTwo
powerful federal laws govern
access to government records.
The
Freedom of Information Act, passed
in 1966, gives the public access
to information held by the
federal government, with certain
exceptions. Each state has its
own laws concerning disclosure of
state and local government
bodies. There is no specific form
for requesting information; it is
generally by letter directed to
the head of the particular
agency.
The
Privacy Act (5 USC,
section 552a) concerns your
ability to request records
maintained about you
individually. As with the Freedom
of Information Act, there is no
specific format for requesting
the records. The government may
withhold information under
certain exceptions, such as
national security concerns.
|
|
REIGN BY TERROR
Id personally seen Reginas management
style before. At the age of twenty-something, I
was appointed a special agent of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation. While I was attending
the FBI Academy in 1972, J. Edgar Hoover died in
his sleep. I learned about it when I went to
breakfast the next morning. You couldnt
wipe the smiles off the faces of many veteran and
rookie agents.
Although Hoover
did much good by helping create a legendary law
enforcement agency, few would dispute that he
reigned by terror. Those employees who displeased
him were demoted, transferred or fired. Even U.S.
presidents were fearful of Hoovers wrath.
He surrounded himself with those who would obey
him without question. According to lore, the FBI
director was once reading a memorandum when he
noticed that the documents margins were too
wide. On the memo, he wrote, Watch the
borders. Without asking why, Hoovers
underlings immediately dispatched agents to the
crossings at Mexico and Canada, too fearful to
inquire of him as to what they should be
watching.
Much the same
atmosphere existed in Reginas reign.
Although the college had various boards and
committees to provide fiscal oversight, the
president ruled with an iron fist; her decisions
were not to be questioned by anyone, any time,
under any circumstances. Regardless, Kranacher
knew by looking at the documentation that
something appeared very, very wrong.
Rumors also had
been swirling around the institution that
Reginas lavish spending habits added to the
deepening financial crisis at the school.
Whatever the situation, the CPA was determined to
get to the bottom of it, even if it cost her job.
By gaining the trust of several employees who
worked in the administrative offices of the
college, Kranacher was secretly provided with
documents that showed the president had used the
schools expense account reimbursements to
line her own pockets. Kranacher compiled a
summary report with copies of the illicit expense
account charges that she presented confidentially
to the faculty governance and union leadership at
the institution. But nothing happened.
DEEP DEBIT
The financial problems of the college had not
escaped the notice of one enterprising newspaper
reporter. Like many journalists, he hardly
considered himself an accounting expert. Through
inquiries of others at the college, he finally
was led to Mary-Jo Kranacher. He came right to
the point: What is going on here?
Kranacher explained that she didnt have
sufficient records to know, for certain, the
extent of the problem. The reporter asked,
If I get them, can you help me?
Kranacher agreed to tell him what records she
needed to see, and he would request them from the
college through the states open records
law, which is modeled after the federal Freedom
of Information Act (see sidebar below). Kranacher
would review the documents and give him her
findings. In return, the reporter agreed to keep
her identity confidential. Not Deep Throat,
exactlymore like Deep Debit.
Obtaining the
colleges records proved more difficult than
either of them had imagined. They received
duplicate boxes of documents in no particular
order, and missing records that had to be
requested again and again. Finally, after months
of painstaking and frustrating work, Kranacher
was able to piece together what had occurred.
DISCRETIONARY, SMESHONARY
The president of the college initially was
allotted a discretionary fund of
several thousand dollars to support the
educational, social and cultural events and
programs of the college. This fund had
little oversight, so Regina used it as a conduit
for spending that was highly questionableif
not downright fraudulent. For example, Kranacher
found $84,000 had been transferred out of the
Adult and Continuing Education program and into
the discretionary fund. The president also had
raided the Auxiliary Enterprises Corporation, a
college-related program that raised money from
food services, bookstore sales and campus
parking. Other targets included the College
Foundation, a tax-exempt corporation formed to
solicit and administer funds through various
fundraising activities, and the College Student
Association, which raised money from student
clubs and other sources.
| |
| Steps to Take Do a
thorough background check.
Such a vetting before Regina was
hired probably would have
revealed her true stripes. Some
assume a person vying for a CEO
position requires nothing more
than a perfunctory screening.
Thats not only incorrect,
the truth is quite the opposite;
the more important the position,
the more thorough the screening
should be. Regina didnt get
to be a tyrant overnightno
doubt she had much previous
practice.
Scrutinize
the expense accounts of
executives. Some
CPAs incorrectly believe there is
a difference between the honesty
level of executives and the
rank-and-file; there isnt.
Indeed, according to the
Association of Certified Fraud
Examiners (ACFE) 2004
Report to the Nation on
Occupational Fraud and Abuse, executives
were the worst offenders in
expense account fraud and abuse.
Conduct
a routine audit. Regular
audits by independent CPAs go a
long way toward preventing (but
not necessarily detecting) fraud
at all levels. The thought of
other eyes examining the finances
has been shown to be a powerful
deterrent; the ACFE 2004 report
documents that fraud losses are
cut in half when an organization
is audited.
Ensure
the board of directors does its
job. Providing
oversight is the boards
responsibility and it must do it
right. CEOs cannot be permitted
to operate without checks and
balances on their authority. As
Lord Acton so succinctly put it,
Power corrupts and absolute
power corrupts absolutely.
|
|
WHILE ROME BURNED
Even though the college was already in deep
financial trouble, Regina went on a spending
frenzy. There was the nearly $300,000 spent to
renovate the residence that the college provided
to her without charge, plus about $70,000 to
refurbish her office. And almost $25,000 went for
her coronation ball as president, paid through
the discretionary fund which was subsequently
relabeled the inauguration fund. Kranacher
discovered that Regina had taken an
official trip to South Africa that
included her husband and son, all on the
colleges nickel. And she blew nearly $6,000
on upgrades to her taxpayer-provided automobile.
She even bought 400 copies of a book that she had
edited.
FRAUD OR FOLLY?
Although Kranacher had informed university
officials of the problems at the college, it
wasnt until Reginas wild spending hit
the newspapers that a formal outside audit was
conducted. The auditors ultimately concluded
there was insufficient evidencebecause of
the wide latitude given the college
presidentto prove fraud. Instead, Regina
was instructed by university officials to repay
about $12,000 of the colleges money, and
was asked to step down from her position as
college president.
This was
Kranachers first case of misappropriation,
but it certainly wasnt her last. She went
on to earn her certified fraud examiner
designation and is now the head of the
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners
Higher Education Committee, which is responsible
for providing free support for antifraud
education to colleges and universities. She said
that she has learned a lot from this case and the
ones that followed.
The
situation with Regina is a classic illustration
of how management override can defeat the
internal control systems that are run by human
beings who are often beholden to management for
their jobs, Kranacher observed.
Because this college presidents style
was so intimidating, those below her were afraid
to speak out when she involved them in improperly
transferring college money to her discretionary
fund. In previous administrations, the
presidents discretionary fund was rarely
over $5,000. In my estimation, Regina misspent at
least a half-million dollars. Taking the
steps to prevent a situation like this would have
been much more effective than dealing with the
aftermath.
OTHER MISSING LINKS
Kranacher says others share responsibility for
allowing this boondoggle to occur.
University officials didnt insist on
having an anonymous reporting mechanism, such as
a hotline. Ive now learned just how vital
this is to the early detection of fraud. And the
internal auditors for the university share a
portion of the blame, too. Even though they were
well-meaning, theyd had no antifraud
training and therefore werent aware of the
kinds of people who are most likely to commit
these offenses. In addition, the internal audit
staff reported to the managers of the university
rather than the board of trustees. When you have
someone who is tyrannical, he or she must receive
close independent scrutiny.
A historical look
at massive fraud cases supports Kranachers
latter point: Barry Minkow of ZZZZ Best infamy,
Ivan Boesky, WorldComs Bernard Ebbers and
the Rigas family in Adelphiathe list goes
on. Good CEOs are strong team players. Bad ones
believe its their way or the highway.
Kranacher is glad for the experience, but not
eager to relive it.
I lost a lot
of sleep over this. I worried that by trying to
find the truth Id lose my job or get
sued, she told me. Working on this
case in a cloak-and-dagger fashion may sound
exciting, but in reality it is quite unnerving.
And finally, I am not sure how thrilled I am
about being called Deep Debit. 
Joseph
T. Wells, CPA, CFE, founder and
chairman of the Association of Certified Fraud
Examiners, is a contributing editor to the JofA.
He twice won the Lawler Award for the years
top article in the JofA, for which he
was named to the Journal of
Accountancy Hall of Fame. Wells is also a
member of the Business and Industry Hall of Fame.
His e-mail address is joe@cfenet.com.
|