A $295 briefcase, birthday cakes, food and alcoholic beverages for office parties. Airline tickets and a $451 car insurance premium.
According to a state audit of the University’s financial records, these are just a few of the items paid for with University funds last year, some of which were bought with donated funds and misused credit cards. The report said these expenses are not only questionable, but some are prohibited by state law.
But University officials maintain no school money has been spent inappropriately.
Cathy Pollino, the deputy director for the State Audits Division, said there is a discrepancy between what the University claims to be using money for and what it is actually being spent on.
“Generally speaking, it’s mostly just a lack of accountability,” she said.
The audit is the second of two in-depth looks at Oregon University System institutions to ensure they comply with rules regarding the use of funds. Oregon State University has also been audited.
Many of the expenses auditors criticized in the 54-page report involve what University officials often refer to as “development” expenses — money spent on gifts and events for the purpose of building relationships with University benefactors. Funding for these expenses is provided through donation money dispersed to departments by the University Foundation.
The Lundquist College of Business, for example, spent $7,760 of University Foundation money on football tickets. Donors were told that money would go to developing courses on business ethics, auditors said.
The College of Education spent $3,336 of foundation money to send the dean and another employee to the Aloha Bowl, and the report found that the Knight Law School used $451 of donation money to pay the law school dean’s car insurance premium.
James O’Fallon, the associate dean of the law school, said he could not comment on the money used for the car insurance premium, but, like other department heads, he remains certain every expense investigated by auditors had a justifiable reason.
“Nobody used anything inappropriately,” O’Fallon said.
Marty Kaufman, the dean of the College of Education, said the department’s spending was in accordance with University policy.
He said it is part of any dean’s responsibility to meet with benefactors at University-sponsored events in order to encourage them to continue to donate to the school. He added that without the money such donors provide, many of the programs and scholarships offered to students would not be possible.
The dean and the associate dean of the business school were out of town and unavailable for comment.
Auditors also questioned departments’ use of University credit cards. Of the transactions that auditors sampled, 18 percent — totaling $13,835 — were considered either questionable or prohibited. Prohibited expenses included the purchase of airline tickets, food and alcohol for staff parties, and gifts for departing faculty members.
The environmental studies department had the most instances of prohibited charge expenses. In seven out of the 12 months that auditors studied, they found the department charged food on a University credit card.
Environmental studies Program Coordinator Sara Leininger declined to comment on the department’s expenditures.
Pollino said mistakes have been made at the University because there is not an adequate system in place for reviewing department purchases, and some University employees may not understand the state guidelines.
“They [the University] really haven’t told employees what’s acceptable and what’s not acceptable,” she said.
Considering the number of people employed at the University and the size of the budget, the problems uncovered by the auditors are relatively minor, said Dan Williams, the University vice president of administration.
While University officials will consider the auditors’ recommendations, they have no plans to stop using foundation money for development expenses, he said.
“Those are not expenses that have been to the personal benefit of any of the individuals,” he said. “Those are expenses that are incurred for the purpose of attracting donors.
“If we can improve some of our processes, we will,” he said. “But we’re not going to change how we use foundation money.”