Wednesday, July 21, 2021

UC and Clery and -- that UC PATH $1billion+ has to come from somewhere...

During today's UC Regents compliance and audit committee meeting, with regard to a present committee agenda item on approval of a systemwide audit vendor and plan, Chair Estolano mentioned the UC Berkeley Clery sanctions over two recent years 2019,2020 (for events that UC claims occurred during 2009 -2016) in relation to it.

see archive:

and recently it looks like the campus of UC Irvine came up in this May 2021 report from CSA to the CA Leg-. In it the UC Berkeley Clery sanctions are mentioned again. : 
"Clery Act
Some California Colleges and Universities Are Not Accurately
Reporting Campus Crime Statistics and Safety Policies as Federal Law Requires "
Report 2020-032

It is important to note that University of California is one entity and treated as such by CSA, but the response came from the UC Irvine campus not UC-OP, which is interesting.

In an earlier post we noted here that the compliance and audit committee was falling into a habit of holding very short sometimes 15 minutes long total public sessions and then going into extended closed sessions -and then advancing votes with little public UC community input or illumination of the issues or how they might pertain to students, workers, community. So, it was good to see a discussion in that committee session today. 

Some of the discussion centered around IT issues and while much of the attention might cause one to reach for issues like UC and Accelion. There is also the issue of UC PATH and the CSA audit of UC PATH and the recent CA Leg move to change UC PATH funding from UCOP to campus level, which was mentioned in the opening comments of the UC Regents board and during compliance and audit committee. What has not been explained is: the status of the CSA audit recommendations and implementation of them at UC-- and those comments by regents and their advisers today did not mention if/how UC has hit the dollar figure CSA projected for total costs of that project ? We recall how UC at the time the CSA released their report said that the $900 million or billion dollar figure was very unlikely to be hit or exceeded . Yet, UC still has not provided an actual number for total from inception costs of the UC PATH project and we don't know what happens with the reporting on state of compliance with those recommendations on UC PATH to CSA in light of the move in the CA budget by the CA Leg to move UC PATH from the books off of UC-OP to each UC campus?
 Is that an attempt to hide the total costs of UC PATH?

"The University of California Office of the President Increasing Costs and Scheduling Delays Have Hampered the UCPath Project and Originally Anticipated Savings Are Unlikely to Materialize
UCPath’s Cost Has Soared, and Its Expected Savings Are Unlikely to Materialize"

These are questions in need of answers because it might be that tuition increases are paying for the costs of UC PATH, a project that when first approved for $200 million dollars skyrocketed to $1 Billion dollars with some lame excuses for why that happened. And yes the other questions around UC-Accelion breach type issues need to be clearly addressed in a systemwide ops audit one would think - but the compliance and audit committee has instead delegated away much of their oversight to staff it seems ...

The lecturers and librarians, who teach the majority of courses in the UC system, in public comment to the regents today seeking performance review and evaluations records be created and maintained on their positions and used in decisions about their continued employment - that does not sound unreasonable - that same group also came up in this over the last fiscal year, icymi:
"More than 2,000 employees did not receive their retirement account contributions, according to the press release. The combined amount the university failed to pay in retirement benefits totals roughly $650,000...

“The University administration claims it failed to make the contributions because of a coding mistake in its centralized payroll system, UCPath,” Quirk said in the press release. UCOP did not immediately respond to a request for comment..."

Full story at
and, we join in the sentiment that:
"We might note that the Regents discussed "accountability" in last weeks meetings. It's not clear that we have ever had accountability in the case of UCPath's cost inflation and implementation problems." -- a reminder here also that the UC compensation reports come out in a few weeks - by August 2021 ... the UC nursing staff also raised their concerns during public comment to UC Regents UC students also commented on the forever tuition hikes -- Only 'policy covered staff' may be appointed by regents as 'staff advisors to the UC Regents' , 'represented staff' are NOT allowed to serve as staff advisors to the UC Regents. So, today when a current staff advisor to UC Regents mentioned during public engagement committee that efforts at advertising UC as an 'employer of choice' and highlighting it as the 'third largest employer in CA' to UC alumni as excellent future career prospects..., well , it sounded tone deaf to what was expressed, the realities of the majority of the UC community comprised of represented UC employees' and current students in their public comment to the UC regents today and to all the above, and that's a shame. ___ as already mentioned earlier, here is more on the appointment of Regent Ortiz Oakley as an advising role with US DoEd - at the regents meeting it sounds like he will return to the UC Regents in time for the Nov meeting: "California Community Colleges chancellor to advise Biden team - Los Angeles Times" ___ the regents still are not ready for their 1pm PST meetings -but here is the link to watch this week's UC Regents meeting:

No comments:

Post a Comment