Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
'
Austlr\,Texas
78701-1494
512463-9734
'
5124163-9B38FAX
'
www.tezi.state.tx.us
Academy
of Dallas
Allen.
Re: Special Accreditation Investigation, as Authorized by the Texas Education Code, 39.057
and a9.osa
on-sile
special accreditation investigation of the Children First Academy of Dallas attendance records
March 4-8, 2013. The review examined the charter school's attendance reporting for the 20112012 and 2012-2013 school years.
Enclosed you will nd our nal report on this investigation, including our auditors ndings and
corresponding required actions. as well as your response to the preliminary repoit.
We have completed our informal review of the arguments made in your letter dated December
16, 2014, and no changes were made to the nal reporl as a result of the review.
nal report may not be appealed.
If
The enclosed
you have any questions, please contact Justin Jons at (512) 475-1778.
Since
David Marx
Director of Financial
Compliance
DMM
Enclosure
c
Members
Otce
of
TEA
Exhibit
Children First
Academy
of Dallas
Summary
The charter school is in violation of the rules and laws goveming student attendance accounting
lor the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school years.
Attendance documentation provided by the charter school did not support the attendance data
reported to the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) for the 2011-2012
and 2012-2013 school years.
did not provlde all of the prekindergarten qualication documentation
requested by auditors. During the 2012-2013 school year, the charter school reported
prekindergarten students for funding purposes before completing the qualication process.
Page
ol 5
Children First
Academy of Dallas
2015
January 12,
Re: Special Accreditation lnvestigation
Introduction
administration are responsible for maintaining a system of internal
controls and processes in accordance with the Student Attendance Accounting Handbook
(SAAH), adopted by reference by 19 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) 129.1025
Superintendents, principals, and teachers are responsible to their school boards and to the state
to maintain accurate. current attendance records under the Texas Education Code (TEC),
42.004, and 19 TAC 129.21(a). The following ndings are based on SAAH, TEC, and TAC
provisions and address issues our auditors detected in their investigation.
manually,
All
teachers at the chaner school take attendance by hand, so these computerwere not source attendance documents.
generated rosters
The charter school does not have procedures in place to ensure that the transferred attendance
data are accurate since the school does not have a process for teachers to verify their
attendance data. Auditors were on-site during the second week of the litth six-week attendance
reporting period and noted that all the teacher attendance rosters had already been signed by
the teachers.
(SAAH Section
2.3.5. Additional
at the
end of each
Required Documentation)
and
end of the
all source attendance documentation is maintained for ve years after the
Audit
General
Section
2.1,
request
upon
(SAAH
school year and is provided to the TEA
Requirements)
Page 2 ol 5
Children First
Academy
of Dallas
Using only the attendance documentation that is acceptable under the rules of the
SAAH, auditors reconstmcted the charter school's attendance at the Dallas arid Houston
campuses for the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school years and found that the school
overreported days present at both campuses for both school years.
Finding
2:
While reconstructing attendance, auditors noted some instances in which the charter school
underreported days present to the PEIMS Adjustments have been made as part of this report to
ensure that the charter school is lunded for those days.
Weeks
2nd Six Weeks
3rd Six Weeks
4th Six Weeks
5th Six Weeks
Sth Six Weeks
Attendance Sheets
11539.0
10,3680
1st Six
PEIMS
11,2o2.o
11,650.0
9,840.0
12s.o
11,026.0
11,2990
11,1525
10.8585
10,8525
10354.0
Present
Overreported 1,271.0
Overreported 448.0
Overreoorted 146.5
Overreported 1,186.0
Overreoorted 10,7305
Underreported 101.5
1st Six
Attendance Sheets
Weeks
10,4630
3rd
4th
5th
6th
8,273.5
7,595.5
9,164.0
7.32B.5
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
PEIMS
10,4965
10,5355
10,3165
10,122.0
10,0125
10,1365
10,1450
Present
Overreported 33.5
Overreported 2,263.0
Overreported 2,721.0
Overreportecl 958.0
Overreported 2,684.0
Underrepcrted 8.5
'
10,9695
10,9625
0.0
PEIMS
Attendance Sheets
10,9845
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
10,520.0
10,115.0
9,775.5
9,084.5
9,752.5
10,1995
9,873.5
9,720.0
2 012-2013 School
Day s Present
Atten dance Sheets
1st Six
Weeks
10,9855
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
Six Weeks
8,858.0
10.0920
10,4220
1
9,816.5
9.507 0
Present
Overreported 10,9695
Underreported 22.0
Overreported 405.0
Overreported 424.0
Uriderreponed 11.0
Underreported 32.5
PEIMS
11155.5
11,5920
11.2505
11.0085
.
10.501.0
10,5005
Over-/Underreported Days
Present
Overreported 170.0
Overreported 2,734.0
Overreported 1,158.5
Overreported 586.5
Overregurted 684.5
Overreported 993.5 ,__
Page 3 e15
Children First
Academy oi Dallas
2015
January 12,
Re: Special Accreditation investigation
to ensure that:
staff
Effect of Findings: As a result of the above ndings, for the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school
years the agency has:
~
restored rened days for the six-week reporting periods in which the charter school
undeneported days present and
~
adjusted rened days for the six-week reporting periods in which the charter school
overreported days present.
result in a decrease of:
124.084 rened average daily attendance (ADA) for the 2011-2012 school year and
100.333 rened ADA for the 2012-2013 school year.
2, related to
attendance
documentation.
The charter school provided auditors with results from an internal review of their PEIMS
attendance data. The school's internal review determined that the TEA's adjustment
should have been 14.0 days for the 2011-2012 school year and 70.0 days for the 20122013 school year at the Dallas campus and 55.0 days for the 2011-2012 school year and
103.0 days for the 2012-2013 school year at the Houston campus. The documentation
that the school submitted as evidence of their lntemai review showed a comparison of
attendance data between teacher attendance rosters and information from the school's
attendance accounting software. No other evidence was provided. The school's intemal
review did not use the same methods used by the TEA auditors when we reconstructed
the school's attendance data for both school years using only teacher attendance rosters
that meet the requirements set forth in the SAAH.
The charter schoois corrective action plan Identies actions that adequately address the
ndings.
Prekindergarten
Finding
It:
Eligibility
for some
prekindergarten students and claimed some prekindergarten students for funding before
Page 4 cl 5
During the review, auditors noted that the chaner school had been claiming some of the
students for funding before completing the qualication process. The charter school used tl1e
free and reduced lunch applications to identify students who were economically disadvantaged.
But some dates for parent signatures on those forms were later than the student entry dates
recorded in the charter school's attendance accounting soltware and reported to the PEIMS.
Auditors were not able to check the qualication status of every prekindergarten student on the
Houston campus because the charter school did not provide qualification documentation for all
the prekindergarten students who were reported in the PEIMS.
Required Action: The charter school must develop procedures to ensure that:
- all documentation used to qualify students for prekindergarten is In place before claiming
the students for funding purposes (SAAH Section 7.2, Eligibility) and
the charter school maintains this documentation for ve years after the end of the school
year and provides it to TEA auditors upon request (SAAH Section 2.1, General Audit
Requirements).
Effect of Finding: As a result of the above nding, the agency has adiusted rened days for
those prekindergarten students who were served without proper qualification on le during the
2012-2013 school year. The adjustment will result in a decrease of 6.889 rened ADA.
ndings.
Page 5 ol 5
#057-811
Special Investigation $I13-002
Children Filsl Academy of Dallas
FTE
Regular Raned
FT E
ADA
ADA
Special Edumliun
Humebound
FTE
Hospital Class
Speech Therapy
Resuuma Roam
Slate Schod
Residenllal Care
Mainslwam ADA
1!
Trealmenl
FTE
Non-Public Contract
FTE
(NSLP)
Review
Dillerence
Results
716.364
592.300
(12-1.064)
4.291
0.000
4.291
0 .000
0.000
0.000
712.073
500.009
l124.054!
0.000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0.000
4.251
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
40 .450
0.000
0 .000
0.000
0 000
0.000
0.000
48.450
4.291
4.291
0.000
12.073
12.873
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
823.5
023.5
0.0
0.000
0.000
0.000
4.291
0.000
0.000
0.0 00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0. 000
8057-Bl
Special Investigation Sl13-002
Dallas
ol
Academy
First
Children
Raviaw
Dierencs
Results
112 511
eos.zs5
(101 222)
6.254
0.000
6 264
0.000
0.000
0.000
706.253
599.031
$107 222!
0.000
0.000
0.000
ADA
0.000
0. 000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0 000
0.000
0.000
6.264
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
33.811
0.000
0.000
0.000
6.264
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
33.811
S .264
6.264
0.000
18.792
18.792
0.000
0.000
0 .000
0.000
875.0
876.0
0.0
0.000
0.000
0.000000
FTE
ADA
BilingualIESL
Special Education
Homebou nd
FIE
Huspital Class
Speech Therapy
Resource
Room
O Hume Campus
8-
Mode|alalSevere. Reg
Mainstream
ADA
FTE
Nan-Public Contract
FTE
Gifted
FTE
(NSLP)
Campus
ii
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
>=-"=1
Ye=;ILIl49l5-173
Q0" I44,44%
4*
-v
M
mu
(maul 214-21142::
214-371-1545
(Fax)
RECENED
N15 1 3 7m"
EDUCAWN AGENQY
MI. rm:-1
Division of Financial Compliance
-mus
Fducui
1%?No:1l\C<:;=e::I:nua
M1815-ll. rx 18701
1'
F\ner\<=l=\""
16. Z014
inquired Action Rnspnsc; Spill Ammlinaion lnvesdanlon dud July
me Spcial Aecredimi-m Inveuluun Inna dud July l6, 2014, The Childn-.n
Fm Acadcmy diilf-Q with we nding fmm Tens I-Zducalion Agency Divhiou of Flllllllll
In response to
Ccmplhnne.
(611-lDGI.l1.II
oiaur
pekhndcmmcumndana. we adlhnx11uCh1ldm\FimAnademyuesmlow:anymdirigm
We also diucru with uh:
the Texuiducminn Annoy pet(SAAH Sedan 7.2 Eligibility).
TEA: pxulhnlnary alculnionu ofovarpaymenuo n Childmnflm Academy based on nu:
is mung,audlmfs exunlnnim of PELMS menduwc dun The mil anmum nfSl.$49.4I6.00
elm
2"
aiuendmon
PEIM8
ofiha
miaw
M-Id=my's
incomct. Based an The Childru First
had-70 days.
20l2-Z013
-ll
for
and
had
sool
you
dgn
10ll-2012
revnkd lznnpm (l0l)
CIINIIS (102) h- -S5
tlnyl '10]
will dsvdop
Bednning Z014-Z015 schml yaw, llw upwinlznhnl Ind Administrative 51:5
Iwcunnng
Anzmlmae
Sludul
Edntllion
Agency
lb:
Tana
budon
puliclea Ind pwedwa
baud I81
the
gunning
Appnwed
bc
by
I-iandbuok (SAAH SecIl0n2,3.S). 111:9: pollda will
will be implemcnlod iuunndhmy.
svllhvill dwoiop
Beginning 2014-2015 school year. the superimandam and ndminisnuvc
Sm
in
mm
1.
Id
um n
ELPEIEPEIL
l-viii
UB1/HIRE
F'a\e:1':|
Ta=17l34?15-I73
wl3d:sIoea1ur=lh:PElM8clert:
of
(SMH
implunemed immedhtzly.
rmw
Exhibil
A (campus
B,C.Dm:|E.B|scdono\|tlWi\h'
,
1013 schnnl yuxsblscd 0n1hend.inj:omExhiHlA.
yw201l'l'hCl\lldnnl=in:Acnd=my isrequaring due utaldnnccaljunmau u u school
20l2mnp|1s (I01) Ind nlmpul (I02) in lb lmounl 01' -69 dlys QMZOIZ-Z013 campm (llll)
andcunpus(102) in the unuunl. of-173 days.
for
your
review.
ML
Slnwcly.
Shaw-In Allen.
Superlnuzndcm
a.@L..
FAD.
Z5
359$!
LVlBl'l"'lL
19 57'!
P IJZIBI/BB
\\QT
III.
'44,?
Deeember
David
I6.
Fuenu Involved
ZOI4
Mm
Cempliancz
TX
Re:
Mr.
Special
hry I.he'lexas
Ind 39.055
Mm
is
lb:
an on-sire special
(TEA) Division of Financial COI\'lp|iI-Mn audllnrs who conducted
Educalinn
aitmdance
examined
also
mview
The
20l3.
4-B,
lccrndiutian invsligann of attendance record; Math
years.
school
20lZ-20l3
ruponing for the Z011-20l2 and
Away
We
have submined
the lener dated December 2, 2014.
Children First Academy dlspuxes the nding in
smdum. Based
our
of
certification
direct
well
applications
as
adequate documenminn of smdenl lunch
to
the Texas
funding
owe
not
any
Fin!
does
Academy
Children
on lhe SAAH Section 7.2 Eligibility,
is no dollar amount gvan in fnvae
thue
Z014,
Deaemlm
lctmr
dared
2,
the
Based
on
Education Agency.
is no specics.
afar against CFA. We also cannot dzlmnine the error (s) hncausa were
auditor; examinntian nf
}l\W,,j,,,,..,=,
wen.
Cc
Kelly Evans
cm u-gal Counsel
22
'7"d
LLL9b2ISl6="J.
SIL'S'l6bElL
\1:lD1"-'43
l1l blB?D3C| 91
T Hr.
SEIUCA
.0
ENCY
Austin,ToXas 78701-1494
512 463-9734
www.tea.statetx us
Michael Williams
Commissioner
March
12,
2015
Children First
Academy of Dallas
TX 75241
Dear Mr.
Allen
Fannie Mr Bradford
Board President
4401 Vandervori Dr
Dallas.
TX 75216
plan takes into consideration a previous agreement between the charter holder and the
reached
in
June 2014.
TEA
This nal investigative report includes the charter holder's management responses to our
preliminary investigative report findings, as well as the TEA's analysis oi the district's response
lo each nding. it is noted that the TEA received two separate responses from
the charter
holder which, in some cases. were contradictory in those cases where the responses diftered,
we included both in the nal iEpDl'(,
unlil
Since
Mr. Michael
in
the
DeWd
Director of Financial
Compiian
Enclosure
Exhibit
Much
I1. ZOIS
RE: Spcchl Accmdiuuiun Invnsriguriun
CC:
TX 751 15
Domlhy L.
Crain, Board
806 Clear Fork Dr.
Dallas, TX 75232
Member
TX 75241
INTRODUCTION
This investigation was Initiated as a result of a complaint received by the Texas Edution
Agency (TEA). The complainant alleged multiple broad Infractions by charter school
administrators suriiclent to warrant an on-site investigation. Upon their review, the auditors
identied the following issues:
v
Accounting,
the TEC, 12.1053, Applicability of Laws Relating to Public Purchasing and
Contracting,
B.
connection with three individuals related to the superintendent receiving salaries from
the charter school when there was no evidence of them performing any actual services
for the school. the charter school violated:
c its Contract for Charter: Chapler1B, Financial Accounting and
o the TEC, 12,107, Status and Use of Funds,
When it obstructed the audit by misrepresenting to auditors that an employee was
terminated when he was requested for an interview, the charter holder violated:
o its Contract for Charter. Paragraph 37, Agency investigations and
o 19 TAC 100.1029, Agency Audits, Monitoring, and investigations
When it did not maintain adequate control over fuel purchases by allowing unknown
individuals to charge premium-grade fuel to the school's account, the charter school
violated its Contract for Charter: Paragraph 1B, Financial Accounting
When it engaged an unlicensed accounting rm to perfonn an audit of its nancial
statements for the year ending August 31, 2012, the charter school violated:
o its Contract tor Charter Paragraph 21 Annual Audit and
o 19 TAC 100.lO47 Accounting for Stale and Federal Funds.
in
in June 2014, the TEA reached an agreement with the charter school which allowed the charter
school to reopen tor the 2014-2015 school year. Some of the actions proposed in the June
2014 agreement may address certain issues contained in this report. An item of agreement in
the June 2014 agreement was that CFA would engage a forensic auditor to review construction
expenses and payroll irregularities. As of the date of this report. TEA has not received the
forensic audit.
Pcgelofltl
Children First
March
it-E:
I2,
Academy oi Dallas
20l5
Findings
Property Purchase
Flndlng1:
A March 2013 review of Dallas County title records revealed that Superintendent Sherwin Allen
md Assistant Superintendent Ciaudis Alien each had a 33% ownership interest in the charter
school property located at 315 Wheatland Road in Dallas, Texas. Both Superintendent Sherwin
Nlen and Assistant Superintendent Claudis Allen were informed of the matter in May 2013. The
drarter school has since submitted evidence documenting a change in listed owners to the TEA
N1 on-line review of county records noted a deed transfer date of January 14, 2014, and
dtowed that the charter holder, Excellence 2000, lnc., was now the owner of the property.
improperly recording the superintendent and the assistant superintendent as owners of the
charter-holder property constituted a material violation of the charter school's contract for
charter and 19 TAO 10iJ,1063.
CFA Response:
CFA agreed to execute qultciaim deeds from the superintendent and the aaeiatant
superintendent to resolve the issue.
TEA Analysis of CFA Response:
CFA provided a copy of a qultctaim deed to the TEA prior to the issuance oi this
report. No further action is necessary. The CFA response is sufficient to satisfy
any required
action.
The charter holder board of trustees did not adequately monitor or demonstrate
The charter school superintendent, who also serves as the board president, unilaterally entered
into the following constmction and property improvement projects with ADI Engineering Inc.
(ADI) without approval or consent from the
full
board:
Pngc2ofiiJ
investigation
0
~
in addition, the charter school tailed to follow required public notice and competitive bidding
requirements as stipulated in the TLGC, Chapter 271, Subchapter B, in alowing construction
Each of these contracts was awarded subject to TLGC, Chapter 271, Subchapter B, which
The board must publish a notice of intent in a newspaper summaring the major
provisions of the contract; and
2) The board must follow certain competitive bidding procedures.
1)
The charter school could not produce any documentation indicating compliance with the statute.
The board of trustees lack of oversight and lack of action related to this contract places the
board
in violation of its
school.
The charter school's iailure to comply with the statute makes the contracts voldabte, subjects
the charter school ofcers and employees to possible criminal charges, and constitutes a
material violation of the contract tor charter.
OFA Response:
CFA asserted that the charter holder board gave full consent to the actions of the
superintendent
in
Additionally, the charter school asserts ADI was engaged to perform construction
services based upon the presumption that ADI was a participant In BuyBoard, a
legally authorized purchasing cooperative, and it was not necessary to follow
CFA could not provide board minutes to support the assertion that the board had
Page! of I0
March
I2,
2015
oi Dallas
3:
Funds.
Into
The amounts
the amended
paid to ADI for the construction of the Wheattand Road campus exceeded
contract amount The charter school provided a reconciliation of the
payments made on the project disclosing an overpayment to ADI. The charter school did
not provide documentation showing that ADI reimbursed the school.
The charter school did not provide evidence that the contractor reduced the balance
owed on the contract for the payments that the charter school made directly to the
subcontractors. This amount is not Included In the calculation of the overpayment.
The chatter school did not provide an executed contract for the Houston campus roong
project.
The roong
project invoices provided to the auditors did not align with the
made to ADI.
payments
did not provide evidence that that the contractor received the
appropriate construction permits from the City of Houston. Nor did the contractor receive
inspection of the work performed according to City of Houston otticiais.
As of the date
of this report, the school has not provided evidence Indicating that
made to ADI.
it
has taken
CFA Response:
The charter school disagreed with the nding In
investigation
Payroll irregularities
Finding 4:
relatives of the superintendent who did not appear to work for the charter school regularly
reoelved payment through the charter school's payroll system.
Three
Debra Allen, sister of the superintendent; Sherwin Aaron Alien Jr., son of the superintendent;
and Niime Muhammad, son-in-law of the superintendent, received wages for work for which
they did not appear to perform.
1.
lives
for the 2013-2014 school year. During the course oi the investigation, auditors telephoned
each CFA campus asking for Debra Allen and no one knew of her. The charter school paid
wages to Debra Allen of $25,500 in 2011 and $26,200 in 2012.
2.
3.
Sherwin Aaron Allen Jr.s position with the charter school was listed as PE/coach. The
auditors reviewed Public Education lnfonnation Management System (PEIMS) records and
interviewed CFA employees. Based on the results of their reviews and interviews, the
auditors concluded Mr. Allen did not perform any services for the charter school from which
he received a salary. in addition to the lack oi F'EiMS data, there were no time sheets or
other types of corroborating evidence to substantiate that any work was performed by Mr.
Alien. The charter school paid wages to Mr. Alien of $43,740.86 in 2011 and $49,230.86 in
2012.
Niime Muhammad received payment as the evening assistant PEIMS coordinator with work
hours of 6:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. During the on-site review of attendance data with the daytime PEIMS coordinator, there was no evidence that any work was being done in the
evening. Additionally, there were no time sheets to support the hours that were allegedly
worked. Although the charter school submitted an afdavit from Mr. Muhammad asserting he
perfomied all the duties assigned to him during the school year, there was no other
corroborative or independent evidence to support the wage payments made to Mr.
Muhammad. The charter school paid wages to Mr. Muhammad oi $35,833.40 in 2011 and
$37,533.36 in 2012.
CFA Response:
CFA disagreed with this nding asserting there was no violation of Texas
Pngeiofl
Children
The issue
in
its
Monitoring,
and
Investigations.
During an orrsite visit at the charter school's Dallas campus the auditors requested to meet with
a school employee to complete their on-site investigative activities. At that time the
superintendent and assistant superintendent responded that the individual was no longer
employed by the school. Documentation later submitted by the charter school in July 2013
indicated the individual was sliii an active employee.
Paragraph 31 of the charter school's contract for charter with TEA explicitly states that the
charter holder, its employees, and its agents must fully cooperate with agency investigations.
Failure by the chaner school to cooperate with the TEA is a material violation of the charter.
19 TAC 100.1029 explicitly states that a charter holder must fully cooperate with TEA audits,
monitoring. and investigations and failure to comply with lawful requests from the TEA
constitutes a material charter violation.
from
CFA Response:
CFA disagreed with this nding and stated that neither the superintendent nor the
assistant superintendent could recall this event.
TEA Analysis:
TEA auditors directly
Page 6 of ll)
March
I2. ZOIS
RE: Special Accreditation investigation
The charter school does not maintain adequate control of fuel purchases and
allows unknown individuals to charge premium-grade fuel to the school's account
in vlolation of its Contract for Charter: Paragraph 16, Financial Accounting; TEC,
12.107, Status and Use of Funds; and 19 TAC l 00.1047, Accounting for State
and Federal Funds.
The auditors reviewed charter school fuel purchases and noted a pattern occurring over several
months of premium~grade fuel purchases although none of the charter school vehicles required
this
type of fuel.
when questioned,
The repeated unauthorized purchases in the name of the charter school of premium-grade fuel
by persons unknown represents a then of school resources. By not responding to these thes,
the school tailed to adequately safeguard the school's assets and it Indicates a break in the
school's system of internal control. This is a vlolation of the Contract for Charter. the TEC, and
the TAC.
CFA Response:
CPA disagreed with this nding and rst responded that the fuel in question was
purchased by a transportation employee who has subsequently been terminated.
In a second response to the preliminary report, CFA asserted that the fuel in
question was purchased for the school van, not for the school buses.
TEA Analysis:
The CFA transportation manager lnltlally asserted to TEA auditors that the
gasoline station pumps were erroneously charging the charter school for
premium~grade luel instead of diesel fuel because none of the school vehicles
required premium-grade unleaded fuel. The two responses to the preliminary
report were radically different and did not plausibly answer the question of who
was actually charging the premium-grade unleaded fuel to the school: account.
Page 7 of I0
Children First
Academy 0i'Da|las
investigation
Finding 7:
Accounting
Funds.
Nwachukvm
Company
oi Public Accountancy.
TEA Division of Financial Compliance has referred Nwachukvvu & Company to the Texas State
Board of Public Accountancy
CFA Response:
response, CFA disagreed with this finding stating that they had
realn-ned with Nwachultwu 8- Company that the iirm's license to conduct audits
was valid at the time the audit was perfonned. In a second response, OFA agreed
that Nwa|:hukwu's status is under review by the State Board of Public
Accountancy, and CFA has agreed to abide by the temts of the June 2014
agreement by engaging a properly licensed auditor to perform their annual audit.
In their rst
TEA Analysis:
The terms of the agreement that CFA entered into with the TEA In June 2014
stipulated that the charter school would engage a properly licensed certied
public accountant to perform the scal year 2012 audit. As of this date, the TEA
has not received the audited nancial statements.
Page 8 oi I0
Children First
Academy ofDnllus
investigation
Required Actions
The following required actions are to he immediately addressed and implemented by
CFA. CFA must submit documentation of the implementation to the TEA no later than
March 27, 2015. This documentation includes but is not limited to training schedules,
forensic audits of construction expenditures and payroll irregularities, audited nancial
statements for scal years 2012 and 2013, new policy directives, and purchasing
procedures governing fuel acquisition.
Property Purchase
Required Action:
1.
No action required. The charter school previously submitted qultclaim deeds from the
superintendent and assistant superintendent to TEA for the 315 East Wheatiand Road,
Dallas property.
administration
2.
3.
in
future transactions.
all
personnel involved
in
The charter school must provide the TEA with (1) a schedule by date and name ofthose
employees selected to attend such training and (2) either a training agenda or a copy oi
training materials provided.
2.
TEA.
The charter school must take action to seek restitution from ADI Engineering,
overpaymenls in the construction of the Dallas school facility and the roong
replacement
2014.
3.
construction payments
in
Houston according
The charter school must submit copies of all communltion with ADI
regarding the recouprnent oi overpayments to the TEA.
agreed to
in
Engineering,
June
inc.
P13090710
oi Dallas
Investigation
Payroll irregularities
Required Action:
1.
2.
irregularities to the
TEA.
The charter holder must take action to seek restitution from Debra Allen, Sherwin Aaron
and Nlime Muhammad for all monies paid to them for which there ls no
Allen, Jr.,
of all
In
TEA.
Obstruction of Investigation
Required Action:
1.
The Excellence 2000 board of lmstees must implement a policy directing charter school
employees to respond promptly and accurately to all requests from the TEA
2.
Use of Unlicensed
Certified Public
Accountant
Required Action:
1.
2.
The charter holder must take all necessary actions to ensure the Annual Financial
Reports for scal year 2012 and all subsequent scal years are aucted by a rm
licensed by the Texas Slate Board of Public Accountancy according to the terms of the
June 2014 agreement.
The charter school must submit
and 2014.
Page I0 oflll