The Savannah‑Chatham County Public School System Audit Committee on Oct. 30 received an internal audit that rated district contract management as "unsatisfactory," citing gaps in approval documentation, contract tracking and vendor oversight.

The audit, presented by the district’s internal audit team, said it tested contract records and found substantial process failures. The team reported that a sample review showed a high rate of missing approvals and missing or expired vendor documentation: vendor performance evaluation forms were absent for 14 of 30 vendors tested and 15 of 30 vendor certificates of insurance were expired or missing. The audit also identified inconsistent contract indexing and reliance on multiple spreadsheets rather than a single, reliable contract register.

The audit’s nut graf: the combination of missing approvals, incomplete vendor oversight and a lack of formal performance metrics increases the district’s legal and financial risk and reduces transparency in procurement and contract administration.

The audit report said purchasing processed roughly 441 contracts in fiscal 2022, 732 in 2023 and 689 in 2024. The audit team said it reviewed 30 contract records in specific tests and noted that many contracts lacked documentation that, by policy, should have been presented to the board at least 30 days before the contract effective date. The presenter clarified that the audit originally measured award dates recorded on contracts but updated the testing to use the signature date when that better reflected when a contract became effective.

Committee members asked whether the district now has current certificates of insurance for vendors. Procurement staff and an assistant chief financial officer said staff have been loading historical records into a new Bonfire contract-management platform and are working to enable vendor self‑service and automated alerts for upcoming expirations. Staff said Bonfire was purchased in 2024 (purchase noted at $73,280 with an additional $9,500 for contract module work) and that staff use the system for RFPs; the contract-management module was not yet fully implemented at the time of the audit. Management gave a target date of June 2026 for full implementation, though committee members asked internal audit and management for interim "pulse" checks before that date on the highest‑risk items (insurance coverage, payments to vendors, and critical contracts involving federal funds).

The audit also reported operational weaknesses: the purchasing department relied on multiple, inconsistent spreadsheets; the ClickOn document system contained index inconsistencies that made locating contracts difficult; and staff lacked formal KPIs for contract management (for example, contracts per staff member, turnaround times, and renewal tracking). The audit recommended defining and implementing KPIs, establishing formal procedures for performance monitoring, and fully deploying the Bonfire contract module.

During discussion, board members repeatedly requested faster remediation on high‑risk items and asked for assurance that payments are not being made to vendors lacking required insurance. Procurement staff stated that active vendors in regular relationships generally have insurance on file and that the primary deficiency arose from renewals not being uploaded during a prior manual process; staff noted they had operated at reduced capacity (roughly 50% staffing) during much of the prior 12 months and have since restored staffing levels.

The committee moved, seconded and voted to accept the contract management audit for submission to the full Board of Education. The chair asked board members to consider removing the audit from the consent agenda so the full board can review it separately.