In an email to the University of Louisville’s General Counsel, Provost Shirley Willihnganz and others on October 27, 2008, Larry Owsley wrote:
3. In January 2007, Dean Felner initiated a $250,000 personal services contract on behalf of the University of Louisville Research Foundation for NCPEp to perform work related to the NCLB grant. This contract went through the normal personal services contract authorization with all the signoffs in Purchasing, University Counsel and Business Affairs. On Friday, we discussed whether the services to be performed were appropriate for a personal services contract. After reviewing the language in the PSC, Cheri Jones and Dave Barker felt that a personal services contract was appropriate for the purported work to be conducted by NCPEp. The review Friday did not suggest that there was anything in the PSC documentation that should have raised red flags by U of L staff at the time of execution.
That caused us to dig back through hundreds of open records we’ve obtained from the University over the past year.
We came across the aforementioned Personal Services Contract from Robert Felner. Something didn’t sit right with us so we started asking questions. Through the process of asking innocent (okay, so we had an agenda to get info, but let’s roll with it) questions we learned quite a bit. And it appears to us that the University of Louisville didn’t follow proper procedures.
Turns out that on Felner’s PSC he had to disclose the source of funding. Funds were clearly denoted as being in the form of a grant for/from the Dept of Education. Crystal clear. The contract ID was GB051512 – with a “G”, meaning grant.
On the form titled “Sole Source Authorization” from January 2007, $250,000 was noted from the Department of Education and Human Development, funding source GB051512, Vendor: National Center on Public Education and Prevention. Signed at the bottom by Lorrie Winfrey, Assistant Director of Purchasing and Donald Spear, who was at the time a director. And at the top right-hand corner of PSC-07-079, PeopleSoft SpeedType, “GB051512″ was clearly noted.
Processing of the PSC should have been immediately stopped and promptly transferred to grants management for processing as a sub-contract. That didn’t happen.
The University didn’t follow its own internal process, which was commonplace, when Robert Felner asked for subsequent years’ sub-contracts (see some of those by CLICKING HERE). UofL didn’t go back to see that he’d already had payments made via his PSC.
So why wasn’t this caught when the University performed an audit? And why is it being ignored by the powers that be at the University? And by the mainstream media?
NOTE: For easy reference, click here for a PDF of the College of Education and Human Development’s financial audit.
Based on everything we’ve ever reported, it’s all about CYA and money. And until we learn otherwise, that’s all we’re left with.
22 responses so far ↓
1 AtUofL // Mar 16, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Great work. Thanks, Jake. We are counting on you to get to the bottom of this mess!
2 Bob // Mar 16, 2009 at 3:59 pm
One more piece of sound evidence that tells us the obvious–you can’t let UL audit itself and still expect a good job from them. Especially in this mess, UL should recuse itself altogether and the state should hire a reliable firm to investigate. Too many in the UL executive suite have dirty hands on this one to leave them in charge of any investigation or audit. They already have confessed that “we have good policies, we just don’t follow them.” That alone should tell us enough.
3 Novena // Mar 16, 2009 at 4:08 pm
“What Are They Hiding?”
Jake, you’re getting close to hitting pay dirt. As in Watergate, follow the money, baby. As in Watergate, can we safely believe anything UofL “leaders” put out? To quote John Le Carre, “Until we have a better relationship between private performance and the public truth, . . . we as a public are absolutely right to remain suspicious.”
4 jake // Mar 16, 2009 at 4:13 pm
On top of this story, I have another coming this week about an employee who was fired– after the Felner scandal broke– because they dared discuss the scandal while at church.
Felner’s cronies were at his call, constantly, even after the scandal was broken on these pages.
And UofL’s leadership team knew all about it, apparently condoned it.
5 Novena // Mar 16, 2009 at 5:15 pm
“Heil Felner, UofL Fuhrer”
That a staff person was fired for informally discussing the scandal at church borders on Gestapo tactics. I often refer to Bobby as “Herr Felner,” and now I realize, even more, how apt that title is. That his damn CEHD cronies continued to be at his beck and call even after the scandal broke gives added support for the use of Nazi nomenclature in describing them. Direct spying on faculty and staff seemed to be the name of the game in Father/Felner Land. Now we know it was no false assumption. When will the lights go out for the powers that be on this campus–those whose principles and actions are without shame or decency?
6 Flag // Mar 16, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Hey, they were “on message”. So what’s the problem?
7 Annex Regent // Mar 16, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Bill “Plate Glass” Stone is foaming at the mouth all over town about the crappy little blog treatment his dear friend Jim is receiving. Bill is usually foaming about the CJ banging Republicans , but Hawpe and the downtown corner are JR’s buddies too so Bill is a little confused.
8 jake // Mar 16, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Bill can foam all he wants. I’ve taken up for him in the past. But if he wants to stand in the way of honesty and transparency in the wake of the nasty, sickening Felner scandal? Let that old man step up to the plate. I dare him to say something about me. Just let me find out about it.
I’ve been hearing for weeks about how pissy he is with me. Just says to me that he has something to hide and or lose.
Hope he keeps it up. He’s already ruined his reputation with Republicans after standing up for Katie King. The last thing he wants to do is turn every logical, thinking person against him. Defending this Felner mess is a big mistake on his part.
9 HarryFTP // Mar 16, 2009 at 7:52 pm
UofL rarely follows its own internal processes. A big problem seems to be that those in leadership positions (JR, SW, and deans) are not even aware of internal processes, as defined in the Redbook and other policies. What’s more, there appear to be absolutely no consequences for failing to follow internal procedures (or for that matter, state and federal law), even though failure to do so represents a huge compliance issue.
10 Annex Regent // Mar 16, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Actually, Jake, Bill doesn’t really know Felner or the story from shinola. He’s just being a good little Uof L Trustee, or thinks he is by defending big Jim. Just like the Lexington airport, when are Trustees and Directors going to realize that they are the bosses and not the hired help? Maybe when they get sued, perhaps?
11 HarryFTP // Mar 16, 2009 at 8:06 pm
They ought to be sued if the best they can do is act as a bunch of rubber stampers, blindly endorsing whatever ill-advised actions JR takes. Here’s hoping they will be in the not too distant future.
12 Novena // Mar 16, 2009 at 8:55 pm
“Is There Breath Left for Rubber Stamps?”
Plate Glass,
The UofL BOC (Board of Cadavers) gives no evidence of owing duty to the many constituents beyond JR, SW, and a few other assorted honchos. It shows no indication of taking the crimes of Felner’s regime and post-Felner antics in any serious vein. It serves to provide CYA-clothing for those “leaders” who do what they want, uncontrolled by anything but PR-value and self-survival.
13 SC // Mar 16, 2009 at 9:35 pm
No way any member of the Board will speak ill of Ramsey during March — no one wants to jeopardize their trips to The Dance with the men’s basketball team. If we really want to clean up this mess, the general assembly needs to pass some legislation restricting the perks lavished on Board members to buy their allegiance.
14 Kentucky: Glaring Error in the Robert Felner Audit at UofL // Mar 16, 2009 at 10:44 pm
[...] PageOneKentucky.com: Glaring Error in the Robert Felner Audit at UofL [...]
15 Novena // Mar 17, 2009 at 5:34 am
“Board of Cadavers Heads to Garden Party”
Yes, SC, UofL stands for the beer and circus of big-time sports above all else. That keeps the Board content, the students compliant, the public interested. Yet it tends to dilute interest in academics and leaves some professors with a sinking feeling of meaninglessness. How many of the Board of Cadavers would attend a conference on how to revive liberal education to help us earn a Phi Beta Kappa chapter after all these long years of trying?
16 HowardWCampbelljr // Mar 17, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Just because the source of the funding was a grant does not mean the subsequent charges to the grant must be made out in a grant or a sub-grant form. There are many times when a PSC is a an appropriate method of accomplishing a grants objectives. Now, I am not saying that this was one of those times, and, in fact, it was not appropriate. The source does not necessarily determine what type of method is utilized to complete an objective although the original grantee may make some restrictions.
17 HowardWCampbelljr // Mar 17, 2009 at 3:59 pm
I meant to say “original grantor”
18 jake // Mar 18, 2009 at 9:59 am
Howard:
According to auditors at UofL, anything marked as a grant must be initially processed by grants management.
19 bill stone // Mar 18, 2009 at 10:59 am
Responding to Novena’s uninformed remarks about the Board of Cadavers, attaining a Phi Beta Kappa chapter is a top priority of the administration and the trustees at U of L. As a Michigan grad I understand more than most the importance of Phi Beta Kappa recognition. It is even more important than getting good seats for the final four to araphrase some comments. Frankly this must happen. no excuses ,it is on top of the things to do list.
20 Novena // Mar 18, 2009 at 1:58 pm
“Thanks for Your Reply, Mr. Stone”
I appreciate your response and apologize for my use of “Cadavers.” I shall not do it again. But I do get frustrated by the lack of Board oversight on what has gone on and is going on at UofL. I am glad that obtaining Phi Beta Kappa is a high priority–though it is something we should have had a long, long time ago (if our priorities had been in place).
21 Flag // Mar 19, 2009 at 3:48 pm
From my perspective, the priorities ought to be:
#1: Build a quality institution, which includes (a) strong academic programs and (b) an honest administration with integrity;
#2: Pursue the honors that we then deserve.
Lacking a component of #1, I cannot see how anyone could take UofL seriously as a candidate for #2.
22 Novena // Mar 19, 2009 at 6:39 pm
“UofL Goals Require Ethical Exemplars”
Flag, your comments are quite well-taken. You put the primary goals of academic quality and administrative integrity at the forefront, as they should be. As you say, only then should any honors really be bestowed. Liberal education, in particular, involves the cultivation of values, standards, and ethical ideals (aims hardly practiced in exemplary fashion by our administration).
Leave a Comment