Thursday, November 27, 2008

The vetting of Michael Kimbrell

In June of 2008, APS Director of Internal Audits,
Michael Kimbrell was fired from the APS when it was
discovered that he was spending most of his work day
watching porn and playing slots. link

One month before that, Kimbrell had been promoted to the
position of Director of Internal Audits.

The leadership of the APS supposedly thoroughly "vetted"
Mr. Kimbrell. Presumably, Winston Brooks, or whomever,
carefully and thoroughly examined Kimbrell's character and
competence before promoting him to the second most senior
position in the APS Finance Division.

Unless you choose to believe that Kimbrell's penchant for
porn and slots, cropped up in the month between his vetting,
promotion, and then his firing,

APS' vetting process obviously leaves a lot to be desired.

The vetting process that preceded his promotion to one of the
highest ranking positions in the APS, also missed the fact that,
although Kimbrell worked in the division for 15 years,
he either remained unaware of all of the irregularities cited by
the Meyners auditors, irregularities that have likely cost
taxpayers millions of dollars, or he chose to ignore them.

Michael Kimbrell never blew the whistle on the corruption and
incompetence, of which he must surely have been aware.

APS' vetting process was evaluated by investigators from the
Council of the Great City Schools. They found that
administrators were being promoted with
no objective evaluation of their competence to do the jobs
into which they are promoted.

The CotGCS auditors wrote;

Administrative evaluations are subjective and
unrelated to promotion and step placement.
Now you have to ask yourself; if APS' vetting process for appointment to senior administrative slots failed stakeholders so badly in the case of Michael Kimbrell,

how many other administrative slots have been filled by men and women who have not proven by any objective evaluation process, that they are in any way qualified to do their jobs?

APS Chief Financial Officer Gina Hickman is a product of
this same vetting process. Did she have to explain, as part of
that process, why she never blew the whistle on any of the
problems cited by Meyners auditors?

An honest administrative standards and accountability audit
will reveal the names of every corrupt and incompetent
administrator in the APS.

APS' own vetting process clearly will not.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Vetting. That means a criminal background check, and speaking to three references the applicant lists as friends. There used to be a standard form for such "vettings" at APS PD in the dark ages when I worked there.

One of the reasons I was SO pissed that Gil Lovato had a triple I run on me illegally was that he hired Larry Brooks with no Triple I, and he turned out to be a child molester! A dude thrown out of the military for touching underage girls, a thing that a simple check of a DD-214 would have prevented, was not on the HR checklist, and that was the lowest common denominator to hire a cop who works with kids.

I bet they did about the same for Kimbrell. Every reference that I ever called on, the three buddies of the prospective emplyees, always gave glowing reports, they had been prepped by the applicant.

So, anyways, yeah, vetting should be more thorough.