COLUMBIA, S.C. — A state inspector general's report into the construction of an early childhood center in Richland School District One found no misuse of funds for the project but did flag violations of law in how the district sought contractors to build the facility and how they went through the permit process.
Inspector general's report highlights violations
The 28-page report was released late Thursday afternoon by the South Carolina Office of the State Inspector General, which had been looking into the construction of the Vince Ford Early Learning Center for the last six months. In January, South Carolina Education Superintendent Ellen Weaver requested the probe after concerns were raised about the permitting for the building and where the source of the funding for the multi-million dollar project came from.
The project was ultimately stopped earlier this year following some of those concerns being raised.
Funding appropriate, procurement process faulted
The Inspector General's Office agreed to do the report days after getting the request from Weaver and spent the next several months using a team of auditors to check the project's origins and execution so far.
The report concluded there was no misuse of Richland One funds to build the project; specifically, the district lawfully approved roughly $31 million of the district's general fund. The funding was approved at a board meeting in December of 2022. Auditors with the inspector general's office looked at the district's financial statements and determined the funding source was appropriate. As of May 2024, the district had spent almost $5.6 million on the project, which went to supplies, supervision, landscaping, foundation work, and other construction expenditures.
The inspector general's report said no further action was required to investigate the funding.
Violations in contractor selection and permitting process
The report, however, found fault with how the district went about the procurement process, which is how it selected the companies that would construct the center. The report found the district approved the construction deals without the proper codes to govern that process, which violates state law. During that process, the report found that the superintendent lacked any approval for the project and that the approval should have come from the Office of the State Engineer.
The report also said the district did not seek approval for several steps of the approval process for selecting the construction companies. It said the district's documentation of its process contained inconsistent language that conflicted with how it said it would award different parts of the project. In one case, the report found the county awarded contracts to two contractors to provide the same services on one project.
Conclusions and required actions
However, the report ultimately concluded that while the district's actions were not in compliance with state law, they were not criminal or done with any fraudulent intent. Still, they said since the entire procurement process was unauthorized or illegal, they must not go back and follow the process as required by state regulation.
The report also found the district violated state law and county ordinances by starting construction without a building permit from the South Carolina Department of Education. The report also said the district began work on phase two of the project without board approval, which meant the district could have been exposed to wasteful expenditures, contractual liabilities, costs associated with project delays, reputation damage, and insurance issues.
Issues with DSS program approvals
The district was cited for not being compliant with its planned services and programs that required Department of Social Services (DSS) oversight. However, the report found that the rules regarding the approval of these programs between the Department of Education and DSS are ambiguous and need to be clarified.
Official responses to Inspector general's report
"As the report importantly points out, the IG found no evidence of criminal or fraudulent activity in the district’s management of the VFELC project," Richland One Board Chairman Dr. Aaron Bishop said in response. "Furthermore, the IG’s report emphasizes how state agencies and the General Assembly need to clarify the current law related to the permitting and oversight of early learning centers, not only for the VFELC project specifically but also for the benefit of all such schools across the State of South Carolina."
"The State Inspector General (SIG) has validated the Department's original concerns over Richland One's violation of state law and wasteful spending," a spokesperson for the SC Department of Education said. "The Department knew the construction of the Vince Ford Early Learning Center should never have begun without the appropriate permit. The SIG report clearly identifies further illegal activity related to procurement."