The external investigation into questionable credit card expenditures that the Jim Thorpe Area School Board authorized last fall has been completed, and, according to its solicitor, Carl Beard, its members will be reviewing the findings of this forensic review over the next month.

The burning question, however, is whether the public will get to see the report or, at the very least, get a summary of its findings.

In a perfect world, since the district’s taxpayers forked over around $15,000, one would expect that they are the “clients,” but in the convoluted world of accountant-speak, the client is the board, and the auditing firm is maintaining that the report is for the board members’ and some key officials’ eyes only.

“Their opinion is not subject to disclosure,” Beard told the board at its Aug. 7 meeting. Board President Pearl Downs-Sheckler made it clear that she wants the report eventually released to the public.

Beard implied that he believes the report should be made public, too, but said he wants to check with one of his firm’s colleagues who has been involved in a number of right to know and open records cases.

A school board candidate, Cindy Henning of Penn Forest Township, has been a sharp critic of some of the expenses charged to the alleged unauthorized credit card.

Because of her questioning and advocacy, at least one board member suggested that Henning is “anti-school director,” an allegation that she vehemently denied.

At its Nov. 12 meeting, the Jim Thorpe board approved spending up to $15,000 for a “forensic audit” to address “rumors and innuendos” about credit card misuse. This raises a question as to why the board received a forensic “review” when it authorized a forensic “audit.”

A forensic audit is an examination and evaluation of financial records to derive evidence that can be used in court or in a legal proceeding. A forensic audit may be conducted to prosecute a party for fraud, embezzlement or other financial crimes. “If you’ve ever padded an expense report — or even thought about it — know that this is an example of fraud and could be uncovered easily by a forensic audit,” said Carla Tardi of Investopedia.

A forensic review, on the other hand, is a focused way to monitor the effectiveness of management and the risks associated with diverse activities.

In addition to determining the propriety of the credit card expenditures, the accounting firm Brown, Schultz, Sheridan and Fritz of Camp Hill also was tasked with trying to find out why late charges were assessed and how the rewards points accrued on the card were handled and who benefited from them.

This is the description of the CPA’s role to clients: “Our team of forensic accountants works with organizations to detect and deter fraudulent acts by employees. Our professionals can consult with clients about fraud prevention and can provide financial investigation services where fraud is suspected. If fraud is discovered, we can identify the economic damages and give expert witness testimony in cases that are prosecuted. Because the reputations of individuals and organizations are at stake, our professionals are discreet when conducting investigations or assisting clients in the implementation of fraud-prevention measures.”

Henning said she and an another board candidate, Paul Montemuro, have been seeking to see all expenses charged to the credit card, but she said the former Superintendent Brian Gasper and business manager and board secretary Lauren Kovac, who allegedly opened the credit card, had stonewalled their efforts to get the documentation. Finally, she said, she and Montemuro were granted just about 90 minutes earlier this year to look through the expenses but could not make copies or take photos.

Henning recalls seeing payments such as $500 for basketball sneakers, expenditures to J. Crew, a sports clothing company, $400 for a limousine trip, “many” restaurant bills and first class airfare to the National School Boards Association Conference. She said there is no policy for daily expenditure limits and wondered why one person was spending about $100 for one meal.

Henning said that although the credit card was never authorized by the board, its members continued to approve monthly payments.

In a school district, every employee’s and official’s expenses requiring the spending of public funds need accountability.

Financial advisers and CPAs to whom I spoke said public officials need to be particularly careful in the use of credit cards, if, in fact, they need them at all. They can be dangerous, especially if there are not tight controls. This appears to have been the case in the Jim Thorpe district.

The board members must approve the district’s expenditures monthly, and virtually all of these bills should be open to public scrutiny unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise.

I agree with Beard that board members and key officials should be given a reasonable period of time to digest the report and have an opportunity to discuss its implications, especially if legal consequences might be an outcome.

I also believe that most district residents want the report released as soon as possible, preferably no later than Sept. 30 followed by a public meeting a few weeks later where taxpayers can question the conclusions and find out what controls are to be put in place.

By Bruce Frassinelli | tneditor@tnonline.com