I received same report Thursday and interestingly I was not impressed due to the outdated information.

Companies that were listed as donors have been closed for several years, indvidual donors who have discontinued giving, etc.  Possibly if the report was intended to give information from last ten years and not 2005 it was accurate.

The layout was good, quality of printing excellent but junky information

Just the numbers wrote:

---

Is this available on-line?

---

No. Check the Facts and Figures page of the USM Foundation, last updated Sept. 19, 2005:

http://www.usm.edu/foundation/facts_figures.html

the usm foundation is a financial disaster waiting to be revealed. nobody knows how much money it has, how much has been given, or where the money went. this isn't thames' fault. akl was at the helm when the careless handling began. thames has instituted controls and has authorized a reverse audit to determine what money went where. i know you all hate thames, but the foundation problem is not his fault, unless you think he had control over the usm foundation back in the early 1990s.

AKL did not claim that he was running USM like a business, SFT has made that claim.  Until there is a truly independent audit of the Foundation and USM, the figures are of little value.  Moreover, expenditures from the foundation often have restrictive covenants attached to the gift.  Donations were made for specific expenditures.  Since many of these funds no longer are being used for their stated purpose, we have malfeasance.

Regardless of who allowed the Foundation accounting to get screwed up, shouldn't someone intervene to make sure that they are getting back on track?  This is not that difficult to do.  They are a 501(c)(3) and as such anyone can request a copy of their 990 federal tax return.  A lot of valuable information would be on that document.  I am not in the state of MS any more so I cannot stop by the office and pick one up, but someone on your campus should easily be able to do so.  The Hattiesburg American could also pick up a copy!

Gunslinger wrote,

you are a prejudiced fool, cossack. all you can think about is your hate fo sft. akl was bad in a different way.

No matter how bad and foolish I am, you do not have a public audit of the foundation's books unless one has been done very recently. What ever happened on AKL's watch can be determined by an audit. What has happened on SFT's watch can be determined by an audit. If you have information that will enlighten us as to how the foundation has spent funds that were earmarked for special purposes, I would be eager to hear it. I do know of some specific earmarked contributions that were to be used for scholarships for students. That scholarship money is not now given to students. I do not know if it being diverted to another purpose by the foundation or some administrator. It may just be sitting there drawing interest. Whatever has happened, worthy students are not receiving the scholarship money that the contributors designated. Even a prejudiced fool such as I can see that not funding student scholarships is unseemly and reflects badly on USM. It also can have a negative on future donors. I can only glean from your comments that you are comfortable with the existing situation.

gunslinger wrote:

---

cossack,

you must have ignored previous posts that mentioned that an audit is currently underway. it is the first of its kind. apparently you also are ignoring the fact that akl allowed the foundation to pay out scholarships regardless of whether the money was in the account or not. again, your desire to be rid of thames is obstructing your view.

---

Gunslinger:

Cossack discusses the issues and you resort all too often to personal comments; why is that?

I do not believe I have ever read Cossack to say that AKL was only pure and good; quite the contrary. His comments concerning the current administration are about the current administration. Perhaps you could focus there as well.

IF an audit has begun, by whom? At this point, if it is an internal audit, it is a complete waste of time. IF an audit has begun by outside auditors (not in any way attached to the school or any key members of the school), why is that not publicized to show good intentions and trying to make it better? I doubt it has begun.

Many people have asked for more civility on the board. Please try.

TBS

I feel sure the previous poster is not "Truth" aka Andrea. Poster, please use a different nom.

Tired of being sick wrote:

---

Gunslinger:

Cossack discusses the issues and you resort all too often to personal comments; why is that?

I do not believe I have ever read Cossack to say that AKL was only pure and good; quite the contrary. His comments concerning the current administration are about the current administration. Perhaps you could focus there as well.

IF an audit has begun, by whom? At this point, if it is an internal audit, it is a complete waste of time. IF an audit has begun by outside auditors (not in any way attached to the school or any key members of the school), why is that not publicized to show good intentions and trying to make it better? I doubt it has begun.

Many people have asked for more civility on the board. Please try.

TBS

---

my statements may feel like personal attacks to those who should take them personally. i am pointing out biases that are baseless. for that i do not apologize. it has been mentioned upthread that a reverse audit is being conducted simply to find out what money went where. under the old foundation management, money was taken out to pay scholarships and other outflows without regard for the balance of the appropriate account/rebalancing that account, or other basic bookkeeping functions.

cossack (and now you) have decided that thames' involvement in this is all that matters because he's in the chair right now. while he is not doing all he can to make the situation better, this isn't entirely his fault. you're correct that we need an outside audit. what would the auditors look at? there's nothing there that's in an organized format. the reverse audit will match specific payments with specific accounts and will be able to identify the correct balances for each and every account.

i understand distrust. i simply want the blame to lie with the appropriate people.

Tired of being sick = far from gruntled???

Gunslinger, it really should not come as a great surprise to you that there is more than one person out there who thinks your are wrong.

far from gruntled wrote:

---

Gunslinger, it really should not come as a great surprise to you that there is more than one person out there who thinks your are wrong.

---

it also doesn't surprise me that there are several posters who refuse to read posts completely and who respond based on emotion rather than reason.

Gunslinger,  upon some limited reflection about you last post, I have to add that you have certainly ceded the moral high ground on both emotion AND reason in responding to posts.

Cossack wrote:

---

Gunslinger, you did not answer the second part of my post.

I repeat my question, has there been an outside audit of the Foundation and is a copy available? If calling me names helps anyone produce a copy of an outside audit, it is worth it.

I would rather have a copy of the independent outside audit than be called names, but if we can get a copy of that audit, you can call any name you can conjure up.

---

i cannot provide you with a copy of a public audit. maybe dr. dupree's foia request will turn something up.