Auditors say that the nature by which grants were handed out under the Office of the Premier, from January 2019 to May 2022, has begged the question of whether the programme was used for political reasons, rather than the socio-economic issues for which it was created.
Of a sample of 301 approved applications and transactions responsible for over $6.7 million in expenditure, auditors did not find any supporting documentation such as invoices, quotations or past due bills beyond the initial letter requesting assistance.
These unsubstantiated requests represented over $3.2 million granted seemingly without any verification of actual need.
The audit said that while the programme offered over $2.6 million in assistance to persons purportedly pursuing some form of higher education, about $788,543.00 was awarded in that regard without any documented evidence that the applicants were actually enrolled in any educational institution as the requests for assistance did not contain documentation such as acceptance letters, transcripts or other supporting documents to prove actual acceptance or enrolment.
Furthermore, the audit revealed the Premier’s Office’s Assistance Grants Programme was believed to have been fully funding scholarships of individuals absent of any of the protocols and requirements of the Virgin Islands Scholarship Programme. Therefore, without considerations for eligibility, academic requirements, limitations on the use of funds, restrictions on changes in academic programmes and bonding requirements.
The programme awarded $757,643.97 to assist with home repairs, however, auditors said that about 67 percent of approved applications were awarded without any documentation, such as estimates or invoices, to support the awards.
The audit also found that 5 people were awarded, totalling $99,000, for startup business ventures without submitting any documentation, business plan, evidence of the viability of the intended venture or had any evaluation completed on the business venture before funds could be disbursed.
“This represents a lack of due diligence in disbursing public funds as there was no sound basis to support the decision other than the applicant’s desire to pursue an entrepreneurial endeavour”, the report said.