The San Dieguito Union High School District will commission an external audit of all nonprofit foundations associated with its schools, after a report by two Canyon Crest Academy students on their school foundation’s finances prompted praise, backlash and a spectrum of outrage in the school community and beyond. The purpose of the audit is “to ensure that all practices are legally sound, transparent, and consistent with district policy, and executed with integrity,” San Dieguito said in announcing the audit Wednesday. The district added, “for the benefit of those who dedicate their valuable time and service to the foundations and to support the continued success of our foundations, recent questions regarding its operations must be answered.” The district said it will hire an external auditor to start work next month, with the aim of completing the audit by the end of the first semester on Dec. 19. The announcement came days after The San Diego Union-Tribune reported on two 17-year-old Canyon Crest Academy seniors, Kevin Wang and Litong Tian, who had investigated the school’s nonprofit foundation and published a report that criticized its financial practices. The district decision to initiate the audit was made by Superintendent Anne Staffieri, according to Board President Rimga Viskanta. Viskanta noted San Dieguito policy requires that school-connected organizations, such as foundations, agree to let the district audit their financial records whenever any concern is raised about the use of the funds. “I fully support (Staffieri’s) decision to conduct an audit by hiring an independent, professional audit firm that has not previously worked with the district,” Viskanta said in an email. “This ensures a transparent and impartial examination of the concerns raised.” Canyon Crest Foundation President Sandra Sincek said in an email her nonprofit welcomes the news of the audit, “as we are confident in the integrity of our program.” She added that the foundation board has formed an audit and financial oversight committee that will “work with outside financial professions to review recent concerns.” “The board of directors of the Canyon Crest Foundation is committed to full transparency and ensuring the highest standards of accountability,” she said. Student report author Litong said he and co-author Kevin would prefer the board oversee the audit in the hope of limiting school administrators’ potential influence. “We hope it’s going to be truly independent, but we have concerns,” Litong said. “Obviously, we like to see that they are doing something about this.” In their report, the teens scrutinized the foundation’s practice of taking larger-than-typical chunks of donations that parents and others make to student clubs and using them for other purposes, such as general funds for student clubs or foundation management expenses. They found that when donors contributed to specific clubs via the Canyon Crest foundation, significantly higher percentages of their gifts went toward those other expenses than was typical at foundations at several other high schools in the district. The foundation directs 25 percent of every donation made to certain student programs, like the robotics team, toward a general fund. At other school foundations it’s in the range of 5 percent to 10 percent, the students found. The foundation also uses varying percentages of donation revenue from student clubs at the end of the year to pay for its own management expenses. The students’ report also criticized the foundation for not reporting its executive director’s pay on its IRS filings for several past years, as required, and for classifying hundreds of thousands of dollars in spending on its audited financial statements under a catch-all category called “other program expenses.” The Canyon Crest Academy Foundation recorded $1.9 million in revenue for the 2022-23 fiscal year, according to its latest Form 990. The organization asks parents for donations. Last school year, according to its website, it asked them to donate at least $180 per student per year, on top of specified amounts for various classes and activities it says it subsidizes. Those included $50 for participating in graduation, $100 to $200 for taking visual and performing arts classes offered during the school day and $500 to $1,000 for participating in one of Canyon Crest’s conservatory programs. The two students’ report — based on their reviews of public documents, interviews and financial records for the robotics team, which Kevin helped lead — drew both praise and condemnation within the San Dieguito community. Parents and community members also criticized the school’s principal, Brett Killeen, for condemning the students’ report in an email to families and for bringing Kevin into his office to question him about it. But the teens’ report also drew criticism for some of the charges it leveled. Foundation officers said they were “deeply disturbed” by the report, which they called an “attack” with multiple errors. They said the stress it had caused them was “enormous.” “We remain committed to educating our CCA community about what we do and how (the foundation) operates. But please keep in mind, we are current and former CCA parents. We have regular jobs, we have elderly/ailing parents who need our attention, we have pets who need to be walked, we have spouses and children who deserve our time and attention,” foundation officers wrote in a statement posted online. They argue the students did not give them a proper chance to respond to the allegations before publishing the report. The students had reached out to an employee, the foundation’s finance manager, from an anonymous email address prior to publication and given a 48-hour deadline to respond to questions. Foundation officers said the email did not explain who they were, the reason for the questions or how their answers would be used. Kevin and Litong say they wrote anonymously for fear of retaliation by school administrators. Foundation officers said the 25 percent set-aside of donations for general funds is clearly disclosed to donors. The general funds pay for expenses meant to benefit all student programs in a certain category, such as STEM or athletics. In response to a request by the Union-Tribune, Sincek gave a breakdown of the foundation’s “other program expenses” category for the 2022-23 fiscal year. She said those included $349,600 for facilities such as furniture, flooring and sound systems, $164,400 for third-party rentals and “salaries allocated to license management,” $128,100 for summer camp expenses such as coaching stipends, $54,400 in fundraising expenses and $46,600 in “community management salaries” for community fundraising events. Joanne Couvrette, the nonprofit’s former longtime executive director, also criticized the students’ report. In a Sept. 17 statement on her behalf, her attorney William Small said it contained several inaccuracies. Couvrette left the foundation earlier this year after heading it for 12 years. The foundation declined to say whether she had resigned or been fired, citing employee privacy. Couvrette did not respond to this question, but Small said her “departure had absolutely nothing to do” with the allegations in the students’ report. In his statement, Small said the foundation’s “other program expenses” were not “vague and unaccountable,” as the students had described them, and he said they are listed in the foundation’s general ledger. That ledger is not published online. Foundation officers told the Union-Tribune that anyone is welcome to request an appointment to see their line-item financials in person. Small disputed the students’ characterization of the amounts later calculated and set aside from clubs to cover management costs as “arbitrary,” saying that the foundation collects them from student programs proportionally based on their revenue. And he said the report had hurt his client’s reputation. “The clear purpose of the ‘report’ that these students published was to accuse Couvrette of misappropriation and financial wrongdoing, and those very serious accusations were published online without proof and without giving our client a chance to respond to the students’ concerns or clarify any confusion,” Small said. Small said he was “evaluating all potential remedies for these harms.” Litong said neither his nor Kevin’s families have been contacted by Small or Couvrette. Litong and Kevin said they edited their report after it was published on the advice of community members, adding words like “allegedly” in order to be “legally above-board,” Litong said. “Once we became aware of those rules, we immediately took action,” Litong said. “Our intention was not to harm the school, to harm the foundation, to harm another individual.” What Litong and Kevin really want to see, they said, are reforms implemented for Canyon Crest Academy Foundation, whose practices they believe are worse for student clubs than those at other foundations in San Dieguito. They want to see the 25 percent set-aside for general funds lowered to be in line with amounts at other San Dieguito school foundations. They want to see salary disclosures every year for the foundation’s executive director. And they want to see specifically where donations are going, and much less spending grouped under the “other program expenses” category. “Our goal was to push for reforms that we believe are necessary, beneficial and proper,” Litong said.