The chancellor of the Connecticut college system signed a separation agreement after investigative reporting found significant financial abuses performed by him. This is all well and good until we also learn that the chancellor has a benefit package that includes a year of pay, $442,000.
The presenting problem that is particularly irksome is that the benefit package was part of his sign-on deal no matter the reason for an early departure from the job.
So, what could the board have done differently? Multiple things including ensuring that the benefit package could not be rewarded for actual or suspicions of bad behavior. The board might also have done a better job investigating the person filling the role ahead of his appointment. And, should these practices have not been sufficient, there might have been in place better policies that would have limited the potential for financial abuse of the institution.
For now, I am sure the board has learned to do things differently going forward. At minimum I suspect there is an external interim in place and that measures in the form of policies and procedures are also developed to ensure a new system of checks-and-balances.