Accrediting panel probes SU actions
“I can’t comment on craziness. It’s absurd.” Tony Clayton, former chairman of the Southern University Board of Supervisors
The regional college accrediting agency is investigating allegations at Southern University of nepotism and improper micromanaging by members of the Southern University Board of Supervisors.
The Atlanta-based Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on College, or SACS COC, has an “ongoing investigation” into the allegations that originated from former Southern University System President Ralph Slaughter, who remains in litigation with the university, according to correspondence obtained through a public records request.
A Nov. 14 letter from SACS COC Vice President Robin Hoffman to Southern leaders states that the results of the investigation could range from dropping the matter because of insufficient evidence to forming a “special committee” to visit Southern and conduct a more thorough inquiry.
Potentially at risk is Southern’s accreditation in the future. The goal of accreditation is to ensure that education provided by institutions of higher education meets acceptable levels of quality, according to the U.S. Department of Education. Federal financial aid for students can only flow through accredited universities, so losing accreditation could cripple a college.
Southern was first notified of the allegations in February after Slaughter alleged to SACS the Southern Board “continues to interfere in the day-to-day administration of the institution’s Baton Rouge campus and take part in unethical behavior that is inconsistent with SACS core requirements for integrity at the institution.”
Current Southern System President Ronald Mason Jr. is denying the allegations, at least in terms of not violating any SACS or accreditation standards.
“We’re working through it with SACS,” Mason said Thursday. “Much of what is in the complaint has very little to do with SACS standards.”
SACS officials do not comment on ongoing investigations. “We are working on that, but we can’t release any information,” SACS spokeswoman Pamela Cravey said.
Some of Slaughter’s primary allegations include:
- Former Southern Board Chairman Tony Clayton, of Port Allen, had his relative, Michelle Hill, promoted to a vice chancellor position in 2010 without a job search. Hill’s position was changed last month to make her Southern’s director of student recruiting.
- Board member Walter Dumas, of Baton Rouge, ordered that his son, Brandon Dumas, receive pay raises and promotions in 2009. In October, Brandon Dumas was promoted again to interim vice chancellor of student affairs.
- Clayton fired former football coach Pete Richardson. The Advocate reported at the time that Clayton and former Athletic Director Greg LaFleur informed Richardson he was fired. LaFleur declined comment Thursday.
- Multiple Board members intervened to protect Earl Hill, an assistant athletic director, after former Chancellor Kofi Lomotey allegedly wanted to fire him for payroll fraud. The complaint also contends board members ordered Hill, the former athletic director of Southern University at New Orleans, to be hired in Baton Rouge in 2006 after he was caught up in a sexual harassment lawsuit at SUNO that cost the institution more than $275,000 in damages and fees.
- Clayton and Walter Dumas in 2009 ordered the removal of the Nelson Mandela School of Public Policy Dean Damien Ejigiri.
- Board members intervened to assist certain connected students who would have been implicated in Southern’s 2004 grade-changing scandal that revolved around people paying for better grades.
Mason, who came to Southern in 2010, said he has not experienced Southern Board members improperly micromanaging in the university’s day-to-day activities.
Regarding Brandon Dumas, Mason said he is a good worker. “We recommended him for the job not because of who his father is, but in spite of who his father is,” Mason said.
In an August letter to SACS, Mason wrote that Hill was promoted on the recommendation of the former provost and chancellor after only three people expressed interest in the job.
As for athletics matters, Mason wrote that Lomotey and LaFleur did not always agree on personnel decisions. Mason noted that the Southern Board did approve most hires and terminations in athletics, but that all contracts and settlement agreements were signed by Lomotey and LaFleur. “All appropriate parties” signed off on the Richardson decision, Mason stated. Both Lomotey and LaFleur lost their jobs last year.
Clayton and Walter Dumas declined comment and deferred to Mason’s responses.
“I can’t comment on craziness,” Clayton said. “It’s absurd.”
As for SACS’ “principles of accreditation, the agency requires “a clear and appropriate distinction, in writing and practice, between the policy-making functions of the governing board and the responsibility of the administration and faculty to administer and implement policy.”
SACS also requires that an institution’s president or chancellor has the “ultimate responsibility for, and exercises appropriate administrative and fiscal control over” the athletic department.
The SACS standards also note that the Board chairperson and a majority of the Board members be “free of any contractual, employment, or personal or familial financial interest in the institution.”