EDITORIAL: CCSD shows little concern over sloppy money handling

One of the challenges with government bureaucracies is that there’s less incentive than in the private sector to manage money well. Just look at the Clark County School District.

Recently, the Review-Journal’s Eli Segall exposed some shocking results from audits of district schools. At Cowan Sunset High School, an assistant superintendent had staff use a work spending card to buy a portable treadmill and other personal items. The district wasn’t reimbursed for the purchases.

At Las Vegas High School, auditors raised concerns about money being stolen from the flag football program. One would think school employees would be eager to get to the bottom of it, but some didn’t give auditors their full cooperation. The review also found coaches spent more than $4,400 on eating out during a single school year. The money appeared to pay for meals for adults, not students. Also, auditors couldn’t determine the “validity of the expenses” of a $20,000-plus trip the football team took to Reno. At least in this instance, the principal shared that the flag football coach was fired.

But in more than 120 cases, an issue noted or discussed in a previous audit came up again. That shouldn’t happen. Audit findings are a warning that something needs to be addressed. It’s imperative that school principals, teachers and staff take that seriously.

Making this happen can be a challenge in a massive, sprawling entity like the nation’s fifth-largest school district. That’s even more true when there’s little evidence district officials are concerned about the findings. For one, they didn’t go out of their way to publicize the audits. The Review-Journal had to request them.

In addition, district officials refused to comment on these findings. They also provided no evidence the district implemented any changes to address repeated findings.

How’s that for accountability?

When district administrators show this much indifference, it isn’t surprising to see so many repeated problems. Without consequences, problems tend to fester and expand. Discipline and correction have a twofold purpose. First, they force those who made mistakes to fix them. That reduces the number of errors in the future. Second, they send a signal to other school leaders that this is something district higher-ups take seriously and they should too.

But when these findings aren’t addressed, the opposite happens. Those who made errors continue in their ways, and those who did it right have less reason to keep doing so. District officials tried this approach with school discipline. It didn’t end well.

Instead of letting these audit reports collect dust, district leaders need to earn their pay and ensure school leaders have fixed the issues identified.