Module 7 - Remediation

.docx

School

Arizona State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

501

Subject

Information Systems

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by HighnessFireSwan22

Module 7 – Remediation Recommendations | Christina Worley Module 7 – Remediation Recommendations Introduction On November 4, 2011, criminal charges were filed against Gerald Sandusky, which included multiple counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, aggravated indecent assault, corruption of minors, unlawful contact with minors, and endangering the welfare of minors. Some of Sandusky’s offenses occurred between the years of 1998 and 2002, when Sandusky held the position of Defensive Coordinator for The Pennsylvania State University football team or a Penn State professor Emeritus who had full access to the University’s football facilities. Criminal charges were also filed against Timothy Curley, the University’s Athletic Director and Gary Schultz, Senior Vice President Finance and Business for failing to report allegations of child sexual abuse and committing perjury during their 2011 Grand Jury testimony. In June 2012, Sandusky was found guilty of forty-five counts of the criminal charges against him (Free Sporkin & Sullivan, 2012). On November 21, 2011, Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP was retained by the Special Investigations Task Force on behalf of The Pennsylvania State University’s Board of Trustees to perform an independent, full and complete investigation into “the alleged failure of Pennsylvania State University personnel to respond to, and report to the appropriate authorities, the sexual abuse of children by former University football coach, Gerald Sandusky; and “the circumstances under which such abuse could occur in University facilities or under the auspices of University programs for youth” (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, 2012, pg. 8). Additionally, the Special Investigative Counsel was asked to provide recommendations regarding University policies and procedures that will prevent and respond more effectively to incidents of child sexual abuse (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, 2012).

Module 7 – Remediation Recommendations | Christina Worley The results of the investigation by Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan LLP found that there was a total disregard by senior leaders for the safety and welfare of the children that Sandusky had access to. The report states, “Four of the most powerful people at The University of Pennsylvania-President Graham B. Spanier, Senior Vice President-Finance and Business Gary C. Schultz, Athletic Director Timothy M. Curley and Head Football Coach Joseph V. Paterno-failed to protect against a child sexual predator harming children for over a decade. These men concealed Sandusky’s activities from the Board of Trustees, the University community, and authorities” (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, 2012, pg. 14). The Special Investigation Counsel further found that the actions by these four individuals empowered Sandusky to attract more victims and allowed him to have unrestricted and unsupervised access to the University’s facilities (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, 2012). Based on the internal investigation results, Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP provided several remediation recommendations to the Board of Trustees and the University. This assignment will discuss the importance of remediation recommendations after a fact investigation and whether the specific recommendations given by Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP would have better protected the University and its students had they been previously implemented. Remediation Recommendations After an internal investigation, remediation recommendations are crucial for several reasons: preventing recurrence of the misconduct, maintaining compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and company policies, rebuilding trust, improving organizational performance, and avoiding any further legal fines or penalties.

Module 7 – Remediation Recommendations | Christina Worley Penn State Culture Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP recommended that a Penn State-led effort be organized to examine and understand the culture of the University in order to “(1) reinforce the commitment of all University members to protect children; (2) create a stronger sense of accountability among the University’s leadership; (3) establish values and ethics-based decision making and adherence to the Penn State Principles as the standard for all University faculty, staff, and students; (4) promote an environment of increased transparency into the management of the University; and (5) ensure a sustained integration of the Intercollegiate Athletics program into the broader Penn State Community” (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, 2012, pg. 129). Additionally, it was recommended that a University Ethics Officer be appointed to provide advice and counsel to the Board of Trustees and the President. The Ethics Officer would be responsible for providing leadership and ethics training to all employees and coordinating ethic activities with the Chief Compliance Officer (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, 2012). Had these recommendations been implemented previously, the University and its students would have been better protected. The report notes a flaw in the University's culture, stating “an over-emphasis on ‘The Penn State Way’ as an approach to decision-making, a resistance to seeking outside perspectives, and an excessive focus on athletics” (Free Sporkin & Sullivan, 2012, pg. 129). This organizational culture negatively impacted the way senior leaders at Penn State managed the sexual abuse allegations. An important part of the above recommendation is “increased transparency” (pg. 129). Transparency “holds individuals and leadership accountable for their behavior, performance, and adherence to ethical standards” (CultureMonkey, 2024, para. 7).

Module 7 – Remediation Recommendations | Christina Worley Administration and General Counsel: Structure, Policies and Procedures To create an atmosphere of “values and ethics-based decision making” (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan LLP, 2012, pg. 131), there were several recommendations that included: ensuring the President and the Senior Vice President-Finance and Business’ duties are realistic and capable based on their oversight and control, upgrading the position of the Associate Vice President for Human Resources to Vice President who reports directly to the President, and evaluating the size, composition and procedures of the President’s Council. Additionally, there were several recommendations to administrative processes and procedures that aim to improve the background check and hiring processes. For example, it was recommended to “update, standardize, centralize, and monitor background check procedures” and “audit periodically the effectiveness of background check procedures and the University’s self-reporting system for employees” (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, 2012, pg. 132). Had these recommendations been in place previously, there would have been more centralized control of Human Resource functions and increased enforcement of policies relating to the protection of children. Instead, Spanier, Schultz, Paterno, and Curley were “able to make decisions to avoid the consequences of bad publicity” (Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan LLP, 2012, pg. 131) because of the way the University administrative functions were structured and there was a lack of enforcement of child protection policies. Board of Trustees: Responsibilities and Operations Spanier and other University leaders failed to report the abuse allegations to the Board of Trustees; however, the Board must take accountability for its lack of communication with those University leaders. Freeh Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP recommended the Board take several steps to

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help