FINAL REPORT
CASE # 1799: Webster Middle School
Reason For Investigation
A citizen’s complaint was
received alleging misappropriation of school funds, theft, misuse of school
property and harassment.
Background
Method of Investigation
Members of the San Joaquin
County Civil Grand Jury (SJCCGJ) held meetings with district officials and the
Stockton Unified School District (SUSD) Police Department. Certain school documents and police reports
were subpoenaed. The SJCCGJ obtained
and reviewed district policies, procedures and operational agreements between
SUSD police and other law enforcement agencies. A site visit was conducted at Webster Middle School.
Findings and Conclusions
After receiving and reviewing
all documentation, the SJCCGJ concluded the following:
1) Misappropriation of Staff Association funds were
adequately investigated by SUSD Administration and the allegations could not be
substantiated. Cafeteria funds were deposited directly to the District office
and accounted for by school officials. However, the investigation of the PE
funds were determined by SUSD Police Department to be a theft. The SJCCGJ commends the SUSD Administration
on the implementation of a full-time auditor.
The auditor will be making visits to all school sites to monitor budgets
and school funds.
2) Members of the SJCCGJ could not find evidence to
support the allegation of a stolen computer.
Security measures are in place to prevent users from accessing
inappropriate web sites from the Internet.
3) Allegations of harassment have been directed to the
Department of Fair Employment and Housing, which is out of the SJCCGJ
jurisdiction.
Recommendations
The SJCCGJ recommends that
all school principals adhere to policies and procedures on how money is handled
as stated in the Administrative Site Guide.
Response Required
Pursuant to Sections 933.05 of the Penal Code:
Section 933.05 also requires as to each recommendation,
the response indicate one of the following:
a. The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary of the action taken.
b. The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be, with a time frame for implementation.
c. The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation of the scope of the analysis and a timeframe not to exceed six (6) months.
d. The recommendation will not be implemented, with an explanation therefore.