Travel freeze, ROI scrutiny take spotlight at FPA meeting

Travel spending and the “return of investment” from federally funded trips dominated discussion during the Fiscal, Personnel & Administration Committee meeting of the CNMI State Board of Education last Feb. 6 at the PSS conference room on Capitol Hill.

Much of the questioning came from committee chair Andrew L. Orsini, who pressed administrators on how travel is being justified, monitored, and evaluated amid ongoing fiscal constraints.

Federal Programs officer Jacqueline P. Che confirmed that a travel suspension directive remains in effect, with limited exceptions.

“The commissioner did put out a directive late last year regarding travel suspension,” Che said. “That applies to the entire district, including private schools, but not applicable to students. If students do attend competitions, they can still travel.”

She said the move was part of a broader effort to rein in spending and prepare for potential financial shortfalls.

“That travel suspension was part of a plan to curb spending on travel, but to set aside funding for the eventuality of a fiscal cliff,” she said.

Savings from reduced travel, she added, are being redirected to instructional support.

“A portion of that funding that we're not spending on travel is being used to cover differential pay for teachers who are going to be attending PD (professional development) during austerity Monday,” Che said.

Che stressed that any approved travel must be required under the terms of a federal grant.

“We require every FTE submitting a travel authorization to provide proof that the grant-requested travel is required by the grant. By not attending it, it will risk the grant,” she said.

She noted that travel volume has dropped significantly compared to prior years.

Education Commissioner Lawrence F. Camacho said travel requests now undergo careful review.

“We're doing our very best as a committee, both myself and John, to make sure that when we do sign off on certified travel, that these travels are required and necessary to accomplish the goals of the grant,” Camacho said.

Orsini sought clarification on whether recent travel approvals strictly align with grant requirements.

“Are the travels that we're looking at as far as the past two years that we've had to allow, and are these travels all in unison with the requirement that it justifies the need because of the grant here?” he asked.

He also questioned what accountability measures are in place once staff return.

“Are there any reports to these travels, like the traveler themselves, to give some report back to management and then maybe to the board at least to know exactly what's going on with our funds?” Orsini asked.

Che said travelers are required to submit documentation.

“So currently when a staff comes back from their trip, they submit a trip report to their supervisor, and that trip report gets signed and submitted to finance,” she said.

However, she acknowledged concerns that such reports may not be widely shared.

“I can see your concern about what happens to the trip report if only two people can see it,” Che said.

She said the Federal Programs Office and Public School System’s finance division are working on improvements.

“We're being more intentional. The director of finance and I are thinking about ways we can improve that process where we're more transparent,” she said.

“The trip report will be amended. It'll be action-oriented. So when someone comes back, there's a short-term deliverable and a long-term deliverable,” Che said. “We're going to put it into a portal that we have access to and see what the goals were, whether those actions were taken.”

Orsini emphasized that he is not opposed to travel but wants measurable outcomes.

“I'm all for travel if that's what it is,” he said. “I'm just saying that the particular travel that individuals go to, I think there's got to be some kind of synonymous information that will come back.”

He added, “What is the return investment for the cost of this travel? This is all I'm saying.”

Camacho tied the travel freeze to broader cash flow challenges, noting that travel costs are often fronted before reimbursement.

“With that very low appropriation, it results in low allotment,” he said, referring to local funding constraints.

“When a lot of travel, like in the past, has been going on, thankfully, we reduced that because if we didn't, that would be a lot of money that we would have to front first for the traveler so that we can then get liquidated and brought down later on,” Camacho said.

“That money would be that low allotment that would come in, and then we would be short for payroll,” he added. “I think that was the blessing in trying to come up with that decision—it was hard, but it's also what's necessary to allow us to relieve pressure on that very low cash flow situation that we have.”

Che told the committee that federal programs remain compliant.

“We are currently in a very strong position with our 14 programs, maintaining 100% compliance with federal reporting and expenditure requirements,” she said earlier in her report.

Still, she acknowledged that spending reviews have become more deliberate.

“There has been a more intentional way of reviewing these requests,” Che said. “Every request that comes in, every contract, every PO, every purchase request, both procurement, FPO, and finance do take a really good look at every expense to make sure that these are allowable costs and that we're not negligent in our spending.”