Requesting The Office Of The Auditor To Conduct A Performance Audit Of The University Of Hawaii Foundation.
SCR137 is a Senate Concurrent Resolution requesting that the Hawaii Office of the Auditor conduct a performance audit of the University of Hawaii Foundation. The resolution describes the Foundation as the primary fundraising and alumni-support entity for the University of Hawaii System, responsible for managing more than 7,000 gift accounts and administering donor support for research, student aid, and campus improvement projects. It also cites the Foundation’s “For UH For Hawaii” campaign, which has reportedly raised more than $660 million, as a reason to examine how funds are being managed and used.
The resolution does not change substantive law or create new regulatory requirements. Instead, it asks the Auditor to review the Foundation’s performance to assess whether funds are being used efficiently, effectively, and transparently, and to identify any shortfalls or areas for improvement. If carried out, the audit could influence future oversight, reporting expectations, or administrative practices related to the Foundation and its handling of donor-restricted and university-support funds.
SCR137 has no direct statutory effect and does not amend the Hawaii Revised Statutes. Its practical impact is to request an independent performance audit of the University of Hawaii Foundation, which could lead to recommendations affecting fundraising oversight, gift-account management, transparency, and internal controls. The resolution targets the Foundation and, indirectly, the University of Hawaii System and its donors, students, faculty, and campus programs that depend on foundation-managed funds.
The overall sentiment appears supportive of increased oversight and accountability. The bill passed the Senate Higher Education Committee 2-1, suggesting general agreement that the Foundation’s large fundraising role and management of many accounts justify review, but with some dissent. The bill text itself emphasizes transparency, efficiency, and responsible stewardship of donor funds, indicating a favorable view of the audit request among its supporters.
The main point of contention is whether a performance audit is necessary or warranted for the University of Hawaii Foundation, given its role as a private nonprofit fundraising arm rather than a state agency. Supporters appear to believe the size of the Foundation’s operations and the scale of funds raised justify closer scrutiny, while the lone committee dissent suggests concern about the need for, scope of, or implications of auditing the Foundation. No transcript details are available, so the specific objections are not stated in the record provided.