Dive Brief:
- Pennsylvania Auditor General Eugene DePasquale says the state's education department has been unresponsive in an investigation of special advisers like Ron Tomalis.
- The investigation into the department's spending and contracting practices began after Tomalis, Gov. Tom Corbett's special adviser on higher education, resigned over growing media attention around his plush salary ($140,000) and unclear responsibilities.
- According to TribLive, DePasquale told a group of reporters that Corbett's administration has been cooperative, but he is currently undecided on whether subpoenas will be necessary for the education department.
Dive Insight:
Susan Woods, DePasquale's spokesperson, provided more context, explaining that the education department not only delayed responses and missed deadlines, but that it had “poor communication and dodgy responses.” While this audit may have been inspired by the questionable need for Tomalis, who continued to get paid even after he stepped down, the investigation is trying to dig much deeper. It will look not only into Tomalis' work, but the oversight of contractors and consultants going as far back as 2010.
DePasquale is focusing on how often the department has employed "special advisers," and whether or not these individuals have fulfilled their obligations. While he says Tomalis is not the only reason for the investigation, the general focus seems pretty similar to the issues that brought Tomalis under fire. In August, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette raised questions about Tomalis' job duties, reporting that in 14 months of work, his calendar had barely any activity, his phone logs averaged about a call a day, and he had sent out only 5 emails. Complicating confusion over his role was the fact that, despite his title of special adviser on higher education, all of the projects the department provided as proof he had a real job were centered around K-12.
What is disconcerting about the education department's lack of cooperation is the fact that, at the end of the day, it has all of the power. The auditor can only make recommendations based on his or her findings, but has no real influence on the department's decision making.