Stanford Releases Simpson Thacher's Review of College Admissions Scandal
According to Simpson Thacher, there was no evidence that any employee of Stanford athletics other than the former head sailing coach participated in the admissions fraud scheme orchestrated by William "Rick" Singer.
December 03, 2019 at 05:54 PM
3 minute read
Confronted with the task of investigating its own employees' involvement in the college admissions scandal, Stanford University turned to Simpson Thacher & Bartlett.
According to the law firm's external review, there was no evidence that any employee of Stanford athletics other than the former head sailing coach participated in the admissions fraud scheme orchestrated by college consultant William "Rick" Singer.
Singer, who pleaded guilty in March to racketeering conspiracy and other charges, allegedly led an operation that involved bribing coaches and paying off SAT exam proctors so wealthy teenagers could secure admission to top-tier universities.
In a letter to the university community Tuesday, Stanford President Marc Tessier-Lavigne said Simpson Thacher found no evidence of additional fraud beyond the scheme involving former head sailing coach John Vandemoer.
Vandemoer, who was fired in March, was sentenced in June to two years of supervised release, including six months' home confinement, and a $10,000 fine. He was one of 50 people indicted in the scandal, which involved alleged bribes totaling $25 million, according to the indictment.
Simpson Thacher interviewed more than 55 people and reviewed more than 35,000 records, the letter said. The firm found that Singer had directly or indirectly approached seven Stanford coaches about potential recruits between 2009 and 2019, though there was no evidence that any other coach engaged in the scam.
"However, there was no systematic way for concerns about Singer to be elevated and addressed, to ensure increased attention by others he attempted to contact," Tessier-Lavigne wrote.
He also said the school's admissions system, in which athletic recruits are reviewed by the admissions office and not just the athletic department, "appears to have made it harder for Singer to manipulate the process."
After the scheme was discovered and the review began, Tessier-Lavigne said Stanford took a number of steps to verify that the university had received no other contributions from Singer's sham charity foundation. The university also implemented a second-level review process to "confirm the athletic credentials of all recruited student-athletes" and developed "enhanced controls in the university's gift acceptance process," he said.
The university also plans to adopt the recommendations made by Simpson Thacher to "ward off future misconduct," the letter said.
These recommendations include adopting written policies codifying its approach to donations and athletic recruits, emphasizing its stance that admission "cannot be bought, and no donor should ever be under the impression that it can." It will also require development officers to verify the sources and purposes of "significant" donations to the athletic department, and clarify that fundraising results aren't considered a part of a coach's performance evaluation.
"It is imperative that Stanford has the necessary safeguards in place to engender trust and confidence in the integrity of our programs," Tessier-Lavigne said. "Our resolve in this regard has never been stronger."
The state attorney general's office has also recommended that the university redistribute the $770,000 in funds that went to Stanford via Singer's foundation "to an entity or entities supporting financially challenged high school students who are seeking financial support and enhanced preparation toward their college admission." The university said it agrees with that suggestion and will release more details about its plans to that effect in the near future.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSidley Austin Adds Cooley Capital Markets Partner in Century City, San Francisco
An ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Davis Polk Moves to New, Expanded Redwood City Office
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250