In recent years, Iona College has been a friend to controversy. The most recent scandal uncovered involves fraudulent numbers reported to third parties from the former Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Warren Rosenberg.

Upon entering his position, President Joseph E. Nyre was made aware of various inaccuracies in the reporting of the college. As a result, he requested documents concerning the data reported to outside agencies, identified inaccuracies and contacted the Legal Board of Trustees to confirm the inaccuracies and the steps to take to conduct a preliminary investigation. The preliminary investigation, conducted by Tarter Krinsky & Drogin, revealed discrepancies in the SAT data that was reported to various third party agencies.

As a result of the preliminary investigation, Iona issued a statement on Aug. 30 informing the community about the falsified data and suspending Rosenberg from his position as provost.

Simultaneously, Iona created the Integrity in Reporting Committee which seats various staff, faculty and administrative members in order to correct this situation and ensure that the reporting of false data may never occur on campus again. Iona commissioned a full audit with Tarter Krinsky & Drogin as well as independent auditing firm O’Connor Davies Munns & Dobbins, LLP.

Once the audit was complete, the findings were reported to the Iona community and the community at large.

The falsified data spans a nine year period beginning in 2002. During that time, the data was reported to 14 external agencies including the New York Department of Education, College Board, American College Testing and Princeton Survey. The falsified data also spans five different categories relating to freshman acceptance data and retention rates, SAT scores, student-faculty ratios, graduation rates and the number of alumni who donated annually.

On Nov. 8, Nyre presented the findings to the Iona community in various hour-long sessions. He explained the process that the college took to discover, report and commission the outside organization to conduct the audit.

When discussing the falsified data, Nyre emphasized that it was not a systematic increase per year. Nyre said, “The data wasn’t consistent, although it was overstated.”

Nyre showed the year by year breakdown of SAT scores reported to the third party agencies as opposed to the real SAT scores. In 2002, the scores were 20 points overstated, in 2003, the scores were 56 points overstated and in 2004, the scores were 54 points overstated.

After sharing the results of the audit with the community, the college will be meeting with accrediting institutions to ensure that this audit will not affect the college’s accreditations. Furthermore, the college will have to wait until next year in order to determine how this audit will affect its rankings in U.S. News and World Report and others.

Nyre next highlighted the ways in which the college will ensure that a situation like this will not occur in the future.

In the plan of correction, one of the most important features is the codification and implementation of a verification process.  The falsified data left the Provost’s office with one signature on it, Nyre explained. In regards to the documents leaving Rosenberg’s office, Interim Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Brian Nickerson said, “His signature was on the document verifying its truth and accuracy.”

Most other offices require 3-5 signatures for important documents, such as hiring and travel authorization. This new process will ensure that the reporting is accurate and approved by several parties rather than just one individual.

Furthermore, the college will be implementing an Office of Institutional Research that will employ three full time individuals to run the college’s statistics and act as oversight for the college’s data.

Alongside this, the college will be continuing with the Integrity and Reporting Committee and will conduct an independent annual audit of the college’s data system.

As for the current state of Iona College, students and faculty have expressed concern about the repercussions this will have on the reputation of the college.

Both Nyre and Nickerson emphasized that this should not affect the current students as the falsified data only deals with admission rates. It does not affect the rigor of the program or the academic performance of enrolled students.

Another concern that has crossed the minds of students is whether Rosenberg acted alone in the falsification of data or whether he was pressured by other individuals at the college.

When asked this by a student, Nyre said, “There are people that no longer work at the college… so we’ll never understand their full involvement.” He explained that it was the character of the college to protect students and staff, both former and current, and that the college will never hear the side of the story of people who have since left.

The college will not be pressing legal charges against Rosenberg, and Rosenberg will be resigning his faculty position at the college at the end of the academic year.

Iona will continue to form a new strategic action plan in the coming months.

Nickerson explained that this situation will affect the strategic plan insofar as resources will need to be dedicated to the Office of Institutional Research, so it will also mean determining where those funds will not go. Furthermore, the accuracy of the college’s data will play a critical role in determining the steps Iona needs to take in the future.

In light of these events, Nickerson remains optimistic that Iona responded honestly and effectively with open communication that was met with less internal resistance than in previous years. He claims that school officials and board members responded almost immediately when this situation arose and are taking the proper steps to remedy it and enact preventative measures in the future.

The manipulation of the data is another roadblock and embarrassment for the school to overcome. It remains unclear as to what the repercussions of Rosenberg’s actions will be on the reputation of the college, the college’s rankings and the college’s admissions.