MDE's Credibility Crisis:
The Crumbling Foundation of the Feeding Our Future Investigation
The Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) initiated the investigation into Feeding Our Future, leading to one of the most significant fraud cases in the state's history. However, recent evidence has emerged that challenges MDE's credibility and casts doubt on the integrity of the entire investigation. MDE's actions and statements are central to the case's validity as the source of the initial fraud allegations. If MDE's credibility is compromised, it raises profound questions about the legitimacy of the entire investigation and subsequent charges.
Did Emily Honer commit perjury?
Emily Honer testified that she had concerns about potential fraud in the Feeding Our Future program as early as April 2020, just one month into the COVID-19 pandemic. She stated, "We became concerned very quickly," and "As July and August went on, we had more and more site applications coming in for restaurants and I found that to be highly concerning."
Critically, Honer also testified about reporting these concerns to federal authorities. According to the Minnesota Reformer, "Honer said she contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation because she hadn't heard from the USDA Office of Inspector General and MDE didn't have investigatory authority." The Star Tribune reported, "Honer said, she reported concerns to the FBI."
According to transcripts from a July 2021 Deposition of Emily Honer, she was asked about fraud concerns.
Q. Okay. So does MDE have any factual reason to believe the claims were wrong or inaccurate?
A. Not that I can specifically recall.
Q. (By Mr. Watkins, continuing) Does MDE, to your knowledge, have any reason to suspect there's been intentional acts of fraud with respect to CACFP or SFSP?
A.No.
This testimony about contacting the FBI in early 2021 directly contradicts her July 2021 deposition statement that MDE had no reason to suspect fraud.
Emily Honer wasn’t the only MDE official who stated that they had no suspicions of fraud.
Ms. Monica Herera, the former Director of Food and Nutrition Services, had this to say in her deposition on July 30, 2021.
Q. Okay. Was there any concern that Feeding Our Future was engaging in fraud?
A. No.
Q. Was there any concern that any of Feeding Our Future's claims were inaccurate or incomplete?
A. We did not know that. That's the information we were looking for.
Q. Does MDE have any concerns about abuse or fraud in any way relating to the East African community?
A. No.
Q. At any point in time has MDE ever been concerned that there was fraud or abuse within the East African community?
A. No.
Mr. Daron Korte, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Student Support Services at Minnesota Department of Education, had this to say in his deposition on July 29, 2021.
Q. Again, I want to get back to my question, which is more narrow and specific. I want to know specifically and factually, did you have any basis to believe that Feeding Our Future had submitted any fraudulent claims?
A.No.
Q. Did you have any suspicion that perhaps Feeding Our Future may have submitted fraudulent claims?
A.No.
Q. Did any -- excuse me. At any point in time did you believe there was a fraud risk with the way in which Feeding Our Future was operating its sites?
A. No. Again -- again, the concern wasn't about fraud. It was more about meal pattern and adherence to -- to regulations, ensuring that meal claims were being properly submitted.
No wonder the federal government stepped in last week to stop more depositions from happening.
Let’s not forget Emily Honer’s email stating that MDE takes no position if fraud has taken place.
This statement contradicts her recent trial testimony and raises questions about MDE's stance on potential fraud.
These statements and emails are after MDE reported fraud concerns to the FBI.
Lying under oath is one thing, but concerted attempts to conceal information are on another level.
Documented Attempts to Conceal Information: Internal MDE communications reveal deliberate attempts to hide information:
"well as of now, the stoop pais are only on cacfp" "maybe I need more cof feeeee? Stoop77777777779"
These misspellings appear intentional to avoid detection in searches.
Another example: "hey.r did you oar chance remove the stoop payes from peanuts 2 sponsor apps?"
MDE employees also discussed using "burner phones" and personal emails to conduct government business, clearly attempting to circumvent official channels and record-keeping requirements.
You can read all about it here with screenshots.
But with MDE the lies never stop…
The Minnesota Department of Education never seems to want to take any responsibility. They’ve said they didn’t have investigatory authority, which is a lie. They’ve also said they didn’t have the capacity, which may be true but easily corrected. But perhaps the most persistent lie is to blame the judge in the civil case between MDE and FOF.
From the Minnesota Star Tribune article:
"When MDE stopped payments to Feeding Our Future, the organization sued the department, accusing it of racism and discrimination. A judge ruled MDE did not have authority to stop payments at that time."
From the Minnesota Reformer article:
"A judge told MDE it didn't have the authority to issue the stop pay in that manner. The claims continued to increase."
Ramsey County District Court Judge John H. Guthmann has authorized the issuance of this news release to correct these lies.
From the news release:
The Department of Education suspended payments to FOF based on a “serious deficiencies” letter it issued to FOF on March 30, 2021. As a result, FOF filed a motion asking Judge Guthmann to order the Department of Education to resume payments and to pay sanctions. Judge Guthmann never ordered the Department of Education to resume payments to FOF in April 2021, or at any other time.
Thereafter, the Department of Education voluntarily resumed making payments to FOF. The Department of Education was not ordered by the court to do so. After the Department resumed voluntary payments, counsel for the Department of Education wrote the court asking that FOF’s motion for sanctions based on non-payment be denied as moot because the Department voluntarily resumed payments. In a later court filing related to FOF’s separate motion for sanctions based on the failure to approve or deny 144 applications for new food delivery sites, the Department of Education advised the court that FOF’s serious deficiencies were resolved as of June 4, 2021. Of the 144 applications, 143 were denied, resulting in FOF’s separate administrative appeal.
MDE claims it has no authority to investigate and, based on the email record, seemingly no responsibility to intervene.
The falsity of these assertions notwithstanding, why does this department exist at all if we are to believe what they are saying?
From MDE’s own CACFP Permanent Agreement with Sponsors:
Sponsoring Organization agrees to make all accounts and records pertaining to its food service available to MDE and to the U.S. Department of Agriculture upon request, for audit or review, at a reasonable time and place. Such records shall be retained for a period of three years after the date of the final reimbursement claim for the fiscal year to which they pertain, except that if audit findings have not been resolved the records shall be retained beyond the three-year period as long as required for resolution of issues raised by the audit. Unless Sponsoring Organization has elected to receive the minimum Program reimbursements without documentation of participant eligibility, approved and denied Household Income Statements must be maintained for the three-year period.
This gives MDE and the USDA carte blanche to investigate all records of the Sponsoring Organization. I don’t know what other authority you need to examine issues within Federal Child Nutrition programs. It seems like MDE just didn’t want to do any work rather than MDE lacking any authority to do the job.
From MDE’s standard CACFP vendor contract:
Once again, this agreement gives MDE, the USDA, and the U.S. General Accounting Office free rein to request and review vendor records.
Both sponsors in question, Feeding Our Future and Partners In Nutrition, reported fraud to MDE.
Feeding Our Future reported fraud during the House of Refuge situation I reported on previously.
Partners in Nutrition reported a “fraud ring” in an email to MDE in October 2020.
MDE is not a passive observer in this situation.
It's crucial to understand that MDE isn't just a passive observer in this situation. Federal regulations mandate specific actions when fraud is suspected. According to 7 CFR § 226.6(c)(5)(ii)(A), if a state agency has reason to believe a claim is false or fraudulent, it "must":
Issue a serious deficiency for the submission of false or fraudulent claims
Initiate action to terminate the institution's agreement with the agency
Decide whether to suspend the agency's participation in the program
If suspended, give notice of its intent to suspend
Inform the institution of its right to appeal the findings
Despite claiming longstanding concerns about fraud, MDE's failure to take these required steps represents a severe dereliction of duty.
After reading this, I don’t know how anyone can believe MDE is a credible actor, but you are entitled to your own opinions.
These documented contradictions and deliberate attempts to conceal information severely undermine MDE's credibility as a reliable source in this case. The department's actions suggest a pattern of dishonesty and lack of transparency.
The evidence presents a disturbing picture of MDE's conduct in the Feeding Our Future case. The contradictions in sworn testimony, the email disavowing any position on fraud, and the documented attempts to conceal information destroy MDE's credibility and raise serious questions about the entire fraud investigation.
MDE's failure to follow mandated procedures for addressing suspected fraud, coupled with their contradictory statements, suggests gross incompetence or deliberate misconduct. In either case, it severely undermines the foundation of the fraud allegations against Feeding Our Future.
This situation demands an immediate, independent investigation into MDE's actions throughout this case. Furthermore, given that the primary accuser's credibility has been severely compromised, all charges stemming from MDE's initial allegations must be thoroughly reevaluated.
The implications of this credibility crisis extend beyond this single case. It calls into question MDE's ability to effectively and ethically administer critical nutrition programs, potentially impacting vulnerable populations who rely on these services. Restoring trust in this vital system will require full transparency, accountability, and potentially significant structural reforms within MDE.
P.S. Emily Honer was promoted to the Director of Food and Nutrition Services. This is the reward for gross incompetence at MDE.