Another look at institute’s books

Tuesday, Aug. 1, 2006 | 7:29 a.m.

The first of several audits of UNLV's embattled Institute for Security Studies was dismissed as lacking credibility by two university system regents, one of whom called Monday for an independent financial probe.

"This whole thing is just cloaked in secrecy," Regent Mark Alden said. "We need somebody independent to do a complete review."

Both Alden and Regent Steve Sisolak were highly critical of a 14-page report they received over the weekend.

The unsigned report - a performance audit commissioned by the board of the UNLV Research Foundation, the nonprofit fundraising arm of the university that runs the institute - suggested that the counterterrorism institute, despite encountering some setbacks, has made "substantial progress" in its first three years.

But Alden said the report "lacked credibility" and looked like an attempt by UNLV and the Research Foundation to buffer criticism of the institute, first brought to light in a June 18 Sun story.

"This report means nothing," Alden said. "It doesn't tell us what procedures they used in the audit, who they contacted and who did the work. It's an informational piece only."

Although no names or signatures were attached to the report, it said UNLV's Division of Research and Graduate Studies, headed on an interim basis by Vice President Mark Rudin, conducted the performance audit for the Research Foundation. Rudin has been one of the institute's biggest defenders, even criticizing the June 18 Sun story in an e-mail to the regents.

Sisolak said he had trouble giving credence to the report's findings.

"There is a total lack of independence here, and when there's no independence, you've got to question the accuracy of it," he said. "This doesn't do anything for me to answer the questions about the institute. It just creates more questions."

Sisolak said he also was disappointed that separate financial audits of the institute, conducted by UNLV and the university system, will not be completed by Friday's special regents meeting to discuss the institute's failings, including a promise three years ago to make UNLV a leading academic authority on homeland security.

"I've been assured by our senior auditors that the delay is because they're looking at the institute's transactions in extreme detail and that it is taking more time," he said.

UNLV officials could not be reached for comment, and neither could Dan Van Epp, chairman of the Research Foundation board.

One thing Sisolak said he noticed in the Research Foundation report was that, despite putting a favorable spin on the institute's performance, it acknowledged that significant problems exist at the agency.

The report concluded that the institute needs more university oversight and should adhere more closely to its goals, especially in academics.

As part of that stepped-up oversight, the report recommended that the institute be brought under the direct control of the university by Aug. 31.