"Our mission is to uncover and present documented facts with clarity, ensuring that critical information is accessible and that unanswered questions are brought into pubic view".
THE ALLEN UNIVERSITY $24 MILLION DOLLAR ACCOUNTABILITY QUESTION. WOULD ALLEN UNIVERSITY AND IT’S BOARD OF TRUSTEES GET AWAY WITH THIS IF IT’S STUDENTS WERE WHITE?.
HOW RACE MAY HAVE PLAYED A PART IN ALLOWING INCOMPETENCE AND INSTITUTIONAL HEGEMONY TO SURVIVE AMONG THE HBCU’S BOARD OF TRUSTEES.
Let’s ask the question that South Carolina’s higher education establishment may not want to answer: Would the behavior of Allen University’s all-Black Board of Trustees have been tolerated for more than a decade if Allen University’s student population were predominantly white?
Would other South Carolina Universities like Clemson University or the University of South Carolina have been allowed to face years of serious allegations, repeated warnings from whistleblowers, appeals from students and parents, questions about millions, $24,000,000, of missing institutional and fundraising funds and demands for accountability without any response from those entrusted with governance?
Would trustees have been permitted to remain silent while questions about missing federal money and money raised for students went unanswered? Would the public, the press, government officials, and university leadership have accepted the same apparent lack of urgency?
Our opinion is clear: We do not believe this situation would have been tolerated in the same way at Clemson or USC. And we believe the racial implications of that possibility deserve serious examination.
We are not making this argument to attack historically Black colleges and universities. Quite the opposite. We believe Allen University’s students deserve the same protection, urgency, transparency, and accountability that students at any predominantly white institution would expect.
A historically Black university’s mission should make the protection of its students more important, not less. Its history should never become an excuse for overlooking serious concerns about its leadership.
If the same pattern of alleged institutional failures had unfolded at Clemson or USC, would South Carolina have tolerated it? Why should Allen University’s students be expected to accept less?
MORE THAN 63 EMAILS: WHAT DID THE BOARD DO?
Since April 2024, Citizens for Justice has sent more than 63 emails to Allen University’s Board of Trustees. We say these communications included allegations supported by audit reports, internal and external emails, financial and institutional documents, letters from students, and communications from parents concerned about their children’s education.
We forwarded these communications to individual trustees, including Congressman James Clyburn.
We did not simply express dissatisfaction. We provided materials that, in our judgment, warranted serious examination. In our early correspondence, we even cited the Michigan State University scandal as an example of the consequences institutions can face when leadership fails to respond adequately to warning signs.
So we ask the board directly: What did you do with the information we provided?
Based on our review of available board meeting minutes and records spanning approximately a decade, we believe there is little evidence of substantive board inquiries into several issues that had already attracted public attention.
We also allege that a trustee who communicated with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) was reprimanded during a subsequent or special board meeting. We believe the circumstances surrounding that reported reprimand warrant independent examination.
We intend to publish the 63 emails on the Citizens for Justice website, subject to appropriate privacy and legal protections, so the public can read our correspondence and judge the board’s response for itself.
We believe the public should not have to rely solely on our interpretation. Read the documents. Examine the dates. Ask why so many warnings were necessary.
ALLEN DAYS: WHO RAISED THE MONEY, AND WHERE DID IT GO?
One of the most troubling issues we have investigated concerns fundraising conducted in Allen University’s name during Allen Day events at African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church conferences.
The Post and Courier published an article titled “FBI investigating Allen University project as some call for President’s ouster.” The article reported allegations concerning university construction projects and fundraising through the AME Church’s Seventh Episcopal District.
It cited documents indicating that fundraising for Allen University likely exceeded $1 million annually, while the university received approximately $300,000 annually since 2019.
Those reported figures demand answers.
Citizens for Justice has raised questions about the roles of Bishops Samuel L. Green and James Davis, both named as defendants in lawsuits related to these matters. Being named in a lawsuit does not establish liability, but we believe the underlying allegations deserve serious scrutiny.
Based on the information and materials we have examined, we allege that Bishop Samuel L. Green told audiences at live Allen Day events over a period of eight years to make their checks payable to Allen University. We further allege that checks were deposited into accounts outside the university and that funds raised were not turned over to Allen University as donors may have expected.
We believe the public deserves a full accounting of these funds: how much was collected, where the money was deposited, who controlled the accounts, how the funds were used, and why the university did not receive the money as expected.
We allege that more than $1 million was raised annually through these efforts. The exact totals and disposition of the funds should be established through financial records and independent investigation.
Now consider this question: Can anyone name an outside organization that could raise more than $1 million annually in the name of Clemson University or USC, encourage donors to make their checks payable to the university, deposit those checks into accounts outside the institution, and fail to deliver the money as expected without provoking an immediate and sustained demand for answers?
We find it difficult to believe that such circumstances would be tolerated without extraordinary scrutiny.
Would Clemson’s trustees remain silent? Would USC’s leadership face no serious questions? Would parents, donors, journalists, regulators, and elected officials simply move on?
We do not believe Allen University’s students should be held to a lower standard of protection.
WOULD THIS BE ACCEPTABLE IF THE STUDENTS WERE WHITE?
Let’s stop pretending the racial question can be avoided.
Would the conduct alleged at Allen University have been tolerated for so long if the student population were predominantly white?
Would years of warnings, questions about fundraising, appeals from students and parents, and allegations of governance failures have produced the same response?
We cannot establish a hypothetical outcome as fact. But we can demand that the possibility of unequal treatment be examined honestly.
Is the public expected to look away because Allen is a historically Black university? Are students and parents supposed to accept unanswered questions because the allegations involve Black religious leaders, Black students, Black parents, and a historically Black institution?
Does the fact that the people allegedly harmed belong to the same racial community somehow make the alleged conduct less serious?
Our answer is an emphatic NO.
If the evidence establishes that funds intended for students were improperly withheld or diverted, the race of the people involved does not excuse it. Religious standing does not excuse it. Political influence does not excuse it. Institutional loyalty does not excuse it.
This is not an indictment of the AME Church, Black religious leadership, or historically Black colleges and universities. It is a demand for equal standards of transparency, financial stewardship, and accountability.
Black students deserve the same protection as students at Clemson and USC. Black parents deserve the same confidence that money raised for their children’s education is handled properly. The Black community deserves answers when serious allegations concern people entrusted with its institutions and resources.
If conduct would be unacceptable at Clemson or USC, it should be unacceptable at Allen University.
THE WARNINGS WERE PUBLIC. WHY WAS THERE NO GREATER RESPONSE?
In addition to our direct correspondence with the board, Citizens for Justice issued a nationwide press release on September 13, 2024, titled “Allen University Students Launch Online Media Campaign Highlighting Scholarship Funds Giveaways.”
We intended to draw attention to concerns about Allen Day fundraising and the resources available to students. We also possess audio recordings and other materials relating to these events, which we have made available through our website.
We believe the public record raises serious questions about what university officials and trustees knew, when they knew it, and what steps they took.
If trustees knew of concerns serious enough to attract public reporting, did they demand a complete accounting? Did they independently verify fundraising totals? Did they investigate discrepancies between reported fundraising and money received by the university?
Public scrutiny should have been a reason to ask more questions—not a reason to ask fewer.
We believe the board must provide a transparent account of its actions and give the public an opportunity to assess whether its response met its responsibilities.
WHEN DID MEANINGFUL ACTION BEGIN?
On December 16, 2025, Citizens for Justice contacted members of Congress, the Senate, and the U.S. Department of Education.
Ernest McNealey was subsequently dismissed as president of Allen University. We believe the timing deserves examination, although the circumstances of his dismissal and whether our outreach contributed to it must be established through reliable records.
If years of warnings preceded a leadership change that followed outside intervention, the public has a legitimate question: Why did it take outside pressure for the situation to reach this point?
What did the board know? What did it investigate? What action did it take before the matter reached members of Congress and federal officials?
If the board believes it acted appropriately, we challenge it to provide a transparent account of its actions.
Accountability requires more than saying concerns were considered. It requires showing what was done.
MILLIONS IN LOANS WHILE FUNDRAISING QUESTIONS REMAIN
Citizens for Justice has also raised questions about reports that the AME Seventh Episcopal District loaned Allen University millions of dollars over approximately the past year and a half to help meet payroll obligations.
If money was raised through events advertised as supporting Allen University, why did the university reportedly need loans to meet payroll?
That question is not, by itself, proof of wrongdoing. It is a demand for a documented accounting.
Were fundraising proceeds held in separate accounts? Were they subject to restrictions or agreements? Why were loans necessary if funds had been raised for the university? Who made those decisions, and what records explain them?
We understand that Bishops Green and Davis have been reported as describing the funds as being held “in trust” and indicating that the university could have received the money had it asked for it. We believe the exact statements, their context, and the financial arrangements must be examined against original recordings, court filings, and financial records.
If funds were raised for Allen University, students and donors deserve a clear explanation of how they were managed and why the university’s access to them was reportedly in question.
Students should never be left wondering whether money raised in their name ever reached the institution it was intended to support.
A FEDERAL LAWSUIT AND A PUBLIC RECORD
A former Allen University board member has filed a federal civil RICO lawsuit, according to the information available to Citizens for Justice. We understand that the lawsuit draws on evidence and findings from our 2024 investigation.
The allegations in a lawsuit are not judicial findings, and the defendants are entitled to respond. Nevertheless, we believe the filing is another reason for the public to examine the underlying records and follow the proceedings.
Citizens for Justice will begin publishing a timeline of events, including concerns we say were raised as early as 2021, alongside our correspondence and supporting documentation, subject to applicable legal restrictions.
Our goal is transparency. We want the public to examine what happened, who knew what and when, where the money went, and whether the board fulfilled its responsibilities.
We are not asking anyone to declare a person guilty based on our statements. We are asking the public and appropriate authorities to examine the evidence.
No serious allegation should be dismissed simply because it is inconvenient or embarrassing.
98% FEDERALLY FUNDED: WHERE IS THE OVERSIGHT?
Citizens for Justice has raised concerns about Allen University’s reliance on federal funding, which we have described as approximately 98% of its funding. That figure should be verified against the university’s financial statements and the applicable definition of federal funding.
If federal dollars support the institution, questions about governance, student welfare, and financial stewardship are matters of public concern. Students, taxpayers, donors, and oversight authorities all have a legitimate interest in ensuring that funds are managed lawfully and that credible concerns receive appropriate attention.
We call on the relevant authorities to examine the evidence within their jurisdiction and determine what action, if any, is warranted.
OUR CHALLENGE TO THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC
We call on Allen University’s Board of Trustees, university leadership, the AME Church’s Seventh Episcopal District, relevant accreditation officials, and appropriate government oversight authorities to respond to the questions raised by the available evidence.
We want to know what the board received, what it investigated, what decisions it made, and why. We want a documented accounting of funds raised in Allen University’s name. We want the individuals named in allegations to have a fair opportunity to respond. And we want independent investigators and journalists to examine the records.
Above all, we want South Carolina to confront the question at the heart of this controversy:
Would we have accepted this level of alleged institutional failure if Allen University’s students were predominantly white? Would we have tolerated years of warnings at Clemson or USC? Would the silence have continued?
We believe these questions deserve answers, not defensiveness.
This is not about protecting one political party, one religious organization, one university, or one set of leaders. It is about whether students are protected, whether donations are handled as intended, whether trustees fulfill their duties, and whether the same standards apply to every institution.
A historically Black university should not receive less scrutiny. Its students should not receive less protection. Its parents should not be expected to accept fewer answers.
If the evidence supports the allegations, investigate them. If the allegations are wrong, establish that through transparent review. Either way, the students and the public deserve the truth.
We sent more than 63 emails because we believed the concerns warranted attention. We are preparing to publish those communications because the public deserves an opportunity to judge the record.
Sixty-three emails should not be a substitute for accountability. They should be a reason to ask why so many warnings were necessary—and what happened after they were received.
The question is no longer simply what happened at Allen University.
It is who knew, who acted, who remained silent, and why.
And we leave the public with one final question:
If these were white students at Clemson or USC, would we still be having this conversation after more than a decade—or would someone have acted long ago?
— Citizens for Justice
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE & INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS.
To Members of Congress and National Media,
For years, President Donald Trump has warned about the alleged weaponization of the federal government. But in 2026, Americans must still ask: Who holds those in power accountable? And what happens when members of Congress use that power to protect the powerful by interfering in investigations.
With a critical election year underway, these questions must not be buried beneath political distractions. No party, elected official, or federal agency should be above scrutiny.
We are publishing this statement because we believe the public and members of the investigative journalism community deserve to know about serious allegations concerning the handling of a federal investigation involving alleged HUD-related fraud and the exercise of governmental power.
Over an extended period, 3 year old investigation, we have collected and preserved documentation, communications, records, and audio recordings concerning these events. Based on the evidence in our possession, we believe there are substantial questions that warrant an independent investigation.
What We Are Alleging
Our allegations concern the conduct of individuals connected to a member of Congress, the handling of a federal investigation, and whether governmental influence was improperly used to affect the investigation or prevent appropriate accountability.
Among the evidence we possess are several audio recording in which a trusted member of the Congressman’s inner circle discusses the underlying conduct and describes interactions involving federal agents in an attempt to influence and interfere with the investigation. We believe portions of that recording raise serious questions about what government officials knew, what actions were taken, and whether individuals with political influence received treatment that would not ordinarily be available to others.
We are not asking the public to accept these allegations simply because we have made them.
We are asking journalists, investigators, attorneys, and appropriate government oversight authorities to examine the underlying evidence for themselves.
"We Have The Documentation"
Our records include materials that we believe can be independently evaluated and authenticated, including:
*Audio recordings;
*Written communications;
*Government and investigative records;
*Financial and other documentary evidence;
*A chronology of relevant events; Information concerning interactions with government officials;
*Documentation relating to the federal investigation; and other supporting materials.
We have preserved the underlying materials and can identify the source and circumstances surrounding the evidence.
Why We Are Speaking Publicly
For more than two years, information concerning these matters has been made available through Citizens For Justice.
The purpose of this publication is to bring these allegations and the underlying evidence to the attention of people capable of conducting an independent investigation.
Government officials, including members of Congress and federal investigators, have extraordinary responsibilities and extraordinary powers. When there are credible questions about whether that power was improperly exercised, the public deserves transparency and accountability.
A Request to Investigative Journalists
We are specifically asking investigative reporters and news organizations with experience covering:
*Federal government corruption;
*Congressional ethics and misconduct;
*HUD and federal housing programs;
*Federal investigations;
*Government fraud;
*Abuse of governmental authority; and
*Whistleblower cases
to contact us and independently review the evidence.
We are prepared to provide documentation and explain the chronology of events so that qualified journalists can conduct their own investigation.
We encourage reporters not to rely solely upon our characterization of the evidence. Examine the original records. Interview the people involved. Seek the government records. Verify the recordings. Check the timeline. Ask the relevant officials for their response.
If the evidence does not support our allegations, that should be reported.
If the evidence does support them, the public deserves to know that as well.
A Matter for Independent Investigation
We recognize the seriousness of the allegations being presented here. We also recognize that allegations are not convictions and that every person is entitled to due process.
Our position is therefore straightforward:
We are asking for an independent examination of the evidence and for accountability wherever the evidence establishes wrongdoing.
We believe the questions raised by the documentation are too significant to be dismissed without investigation.
If you are a journalist, investigator, attorney, government oversight official, or other qualified individual who would like to review the underlying evidence, please contact Citizens for Justice.
Citizens for Justice
"THE INVESTIGATIVE ARTICLE THAT STARTED IT ALL"
Feds Freeze millions intended for Allen University campus project, questioning invoices
By Glenn Smith and Adam Parker gsmith@postandcourier.com aparker@postandcourier.com
Aug 2, 2024
COLUMBIA — Federal officials have frozen funding for an expensive effort to transform a historic Black hospital building into a multipurpose campus venue at Allen University, raising questions about how the capital project was managed and its impact on the private school's finances.
Renovations to the former Good Samaritan-Waverly Hospital, which opened in 1952 during the period of legal segregation and operated until 1973, were completed late last year when the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development put the brakes on $4.3 million in grant money expected for the rehab. That's because Allen officials have been unable to provide HUD with receipts needed to document the work that was done, according to HUD and correspondence obtained by The Post and Courier.
The site has been open for months. But the shortfall in grant funds placed a lingering financial strain on the small school at the same time it is dealing with a wave of departures among people in key administrative positions, according to two sources close to the matter. Allen's enrollment stood at 657 in 2022, according to the latest data available from the S.C. Commission on Higher Education.
HUD confirmed to the newspaper that it had rejected four invoices submitted by Allen in November due to the historically Black university's "inability to provide adequate source documentation" to support the expenditures. There were also indications that some of the work occurred outside the window for the grant, a HUD spokesperson said.
Allen has until 2030 to gain access to the money, provided that it can hand over the necessary financial paperwork. But HUD has heard nothing from the school since the beginning of this year, the HUD spokesperson said.
The Waverly-Clyburn Building at Allen University.
Dub Taylor, Allen's vice president for institutional advancement, told The Post and Courier the renovated building has been a beneficial addition to Allen's offerings. But he said the school would have no comment on the HUD grant, its financial status or personnel issues at the school, which is affiliated with the African Methodist Episcopal Church.
The newspaper also reached out Aug. 1 to Allen President Ernest McNealey and AME South Carolina Bishop Samuel L. Green, who chairs Allen's board, but neither responded to the inquiries.
The Waverly Project, as it was called, resulted in a repurposed structure that preserved and improved the former Good Samaritan-Waverly building, which was a cornerstone of Black life in the state capital. It was the only place in town that trained Black nurses and one of the only hospitals in Columbia to serve African Americans. Today, it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The project recalls the building's history, while transforming its space to house:
-
The Boeing Institute on Civility, to include a permanent memorial for the nine victims of the 2015 Emanuel AME Church shooting
-
The School of Education
-
The Dickerson-Green Theological Seminary
-
The Waverly Wall Museum Portrait Display
-
The Dominion Energy Palmetto African American Hall of Fame
Dominion Energy donated $500,000 to the nearly $11 million project in 2020. Boeing pledged $1.5 million. In 2021, the Palmetto Citizens Federal Credit Union donated $100,000.
Finding itself still short of money, Allen University solicited U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn’s intervention in securing the HUD grant.
The powerful South Carolina Democrat, who sits on Allen's board, inserted an earmark into an omnibus spending bill passed by Congress and signed into law in March 2022. It gave Allen $4.29 million meant for the Waverly Project. Then, in 2023, he took steps in an appropriations bill to make sure the money would remain available and that Allen's options for using it would be more flexible. That reportedly was the end of his involvement with the project.
The building was later renamed the Waverly-Clyburn Building in his honor, and a bronze statue of the congressman was erected outside.
Clyburn's office had no comment to offer on the project's funding issues.
Everything seemed on track until HUD balked at turning over the grant money late last year, according to emails obtained by The Post and Courier. That correspondence indicates the school hit a wall when it tried to submit invoices for work done prior to the grant period.
“The funds were channeled through HUD, and during faith-killing conversations with the staff there, the realization that we were seeking reimbursement rather than allocation for a new project was finally acknowledged,” McNealey wrote on Nov. 8, 2023, to one of the contractors.
The school had initially submitted invoices using "documentation that matched the real phases and pay apps” prepared by the contractor. Those invoices were rejected. McNealy's email indicated that an Allen administrator then prepared new "invoices" to conform to the HUD-approved application period, though it is unclear from the correspondence when precisely that work was done. He then asked the project's contractor to sign off on the revised invoices as soon as possible.
HUD subsequently asked for itemized receipts to support those adjusted invoices, which apparently put the school in a bind.
A reporter called GMK Associates — the lead contractor — on Aug. 1 seeking more details about what transpired, but a message was not immediately returned.
In the end, HUD notified Allen officials in December that the new invoices were insufficient and that funds would be withheld until more documentation is provided.
The mix-up, along with recent staff turnover, has increased the challenges for McNealey, Allen's fourth president since 2010. He had previously served as president of Stillman College, another historically Black college institution in Tuscaloosa, Ala.
During his 16-year tenure at Stillman, McNealey managed an ambitious capital campaign on campus and saw the school earn its first-ever ranking among the top tier of comprehensive colleges in the South, The Tuscaloosa News reported. But he was also knocked by some alumni and faculty who blamed his leadership for the departure of staff, financial difficulties and declining enrollment, the paper reported.
The Boldest Alleged HUD Fraud Case in South Carolina—and One of the Most Serious in U.S. Higher Education
To Members of Congress and National Media,
Over the past week, multiple developments on Capitol Hill—including the resignation of two members of Congress amid misconduct allegations and reports of additional potential departures—have underscored a renewed expectation of accountability in public office.
In that context, we are formally re-submitting and expanding upon a whistleblower disclosure originally sent on December 16, 2025 to House and Senate education committees.
At that time, we received limited response, which we attributed to the holiday recess. However, recent outreach from Congressional staff indicates that this matter is now receiving renewed attention.
What follows is a summary of documented allegations, supported by internal emails, invoices, meeting notes, and witness accounts. All referenced materials are attached.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF ALLEGATIONS
• A university construction project allegedly utilized millions in restricted educational funds improperly
• After receiving a $4.2 million HUD allocation, the university allegedly:
• Attempted to retroactively qualify already-completed work
• Coordinated the creation of backdated and altered invoices
• A contractor was allegedly asked to sign revised invoices reflecting inflated totals matching the federal grant
• HUD identified discrepancies and formally denied the funding request
• Subsequent communications suggest efforts to seek political intervention
• No known internal or external investigation has been conducted despite extensive documentation
DETAILED TIMELINE (SUPPORTED BY DOCUMENTS)
1. Waverly Building Project (Beginning ~2019)
An on-campus renovation project—referred to as the Waverly Building—was undertaken at an estimated cost of approximately $12 million.
Internal university communications indicate that approximately $8 million in restricted educational funds may have been used improperly to support the project.
2. Congressional HUD Allocation (~$4.2M)
A federal HUD grant of approximately $4.2 million was later awarded.
However, documentation indicates:
• The eligibility window began after the project was substantially complete (approx. 97%)
• This created a compliance issue regarding reimbursement eligibility
3. Failed Initial Submissions to HUD (2022–2023)
The university reportedly made multiple attempts to submit invoices to HUD.
HUD responses (attached) indicate:
• Requests for supporting documentation and receipts
• Concerns regarding eligibility and timing
4. Internal Proposal to Backdate Invoices (2023)
An internal email (attached) outlines a plan to:
• Select and backdate invoices
• Resubmit them to align with HUD eligibility requirements
This communication appears to show awareness that original invoices did not meet federal compliance standards.
5. Contractor Involvement (October 2023)
In communications with a contractor (GMK), university officials allegedly:
• Requested execution of revised invoices
• Indicated the contractor would not be paid again, but participation was needed to secure federal funds
Subsequently:
• Four invoices were reissued
• The total amount was increased to match the exact HUD allocation (~$4.2M)
6. HUD Review and Denial (Nov–Dec 2023)
HUD flagged inconsistencies and requested:
• Supporting receipts
• Verification of invoice legitimacy
The university reportedly responded that supporting documentation was unavailable
HUD then formally denied the application
7. Post-Denial Communications and Alleged Outreach (Late 2023–Early 2024)
Witness accounts and notes indicate:
• Discussions with a Congressional office regarding the denial
• A follow-up call in early 2024 involving university officials and federal staff
HUD officials reportedly maintained that proper documentation was required, and no exception was granted.
8. Public Scrutiny and Internal Fallout (2024–2025)
• Media reporting (including regional outlets) raised questions about the project and funding
• HUD funding was reportedly frozen
• A member of Congress associated with the university board recused themselves
Despite:
• Internal emails
• Revised invoices
• Witness accounts
No comprehensive investigation has been publicly disclosed
9. Whistleblower Escalation and Leadership Action (December 2025)
After notification that evidence would be shared with Congressional committees:
• The university president was terminated within 72 hours
However:
• No formal inquiry into the underlying allegations has been announced
• No public accounting of the funds has been provided
CURRENT CONCERN
We have received information indicating that additional federal funds may be under consideration or allocation in connection with this matter.
If accurate, this raises serious questions:
• Are federal funds being used to offset prior disallowed expenditures?
• Has Congress been provided complete and accurate information?
• Why has no formal investigation been initiated despite documented evidence?
WHAT WE ARE PROVIDING
Attached to this email:
• Internal university emails
• Contractor communications
• Invoice comparisons (original vs. revised)
• HUD correspondence
• Meeting notes and contemporaneous records
• Supporting witness accounts
REQUEST FOR ACTION
We respectfully call for:
1. Immediate Congressional inquiry
2. Referral to appropriate federal investigative authorities
3. Public transparency regarding all federal funds allocated and used
4. Protection for whistleblowers and cooperating witnesses
FINAL NOTE
This matter is not speculative. It is document-driven.
The evidence raises serious questions about:
• Federal grant compliance
• Institutional governance
• Potential misuse of taxpayer funds
At a time when public trust in institutions is under scrutiny, this case demands independent review and full transparency.
Additional evidence—described internally as material and highly consequential—is prepared for release if necessary.
Respectfully,
Citizens for Justice
Allen University leaders sued by former trustee for alleged long-running fraud
COLUMBIA — The leaders of Allen University and the African Methodist Episcopal Church in South Carolina are accused of abusing power and misusing money for years, according to a federal lawsuit filed March 19.
The 129-page complaint by former Allen University board member Karol Widemon Montgomery alleges a longstanding pattern of misbehavior by university and church leaders, including deceptive fundraising, misrepresentation of finances, fraudulent attempts to obtain federal money, sexual harassment and a lack of required turnover among Allen’s trustees, among other claims.
Allen University "Allen Days" Fundraising Scandal Emails
Dear Bishop Davis,
We are reaching out because these questions directly impact the future and stability of Allen University, and as alumni, you deserve transparency and accountability. With reports that the university has had to borrow funds to meet payroll several times over the past 6 months, it is urgent that we collectively seek clarity on where the money raised in Allen’s name—especially at church conferences—has gone. If you wrote a check for Allen University during those conferences, who actually cashed your check, and where were those funds ultimately deposited in Allen University's bank account?
Citizens For Justice is issuing this fact-based communication regarding funds raised during Allen Day observances and Seventh District conferences from 2017 through 2024 in the name of Allen University.
During these conferences, Allen University students were transported, the choir performed, and direct appeals were made to congregations for Allen students. Offerings were publicly collected in Allen University’s name. With approximately seven conferences annually and reported collections of $120,000 to $180,000 per event, the estimated total raised between 2017–2024 exceeds $8,500,000 million dollars. If funds were consistently collected in the University’s name during these years, yet institutional records do not reflect deposits consistent with the scale of fundraising, a procedural and fiduciary explanation is required. ????????
We have all the evidence.
The focal question: Where is the reconciliation of funds raised for Allen University (2017–2024) versus the funds actually deposited into Allen University accounts? How did funds raised in and wrote out to Allen University’s name from 2017–2024 not fully reach the institution? This happened and continues to happen under the leadership of Bishop Davis.
Again, Citizens For Justice is providing this focused communication regarding funds raised in Allen University’s name during Allen Day and conference appeals from 2017 through 2024.
Citizens For Justice
From: Citizen Justice Anonymous
Sent: 12 March 2026 2:39 PM
Subject: Who We Are. And Why We Support The Students At Allen University.
Good afternoon,
This email chain has over 2,000 recipients, and we have received overwhelming support and encouragement to continue advocating for the students at Allen University. Many have asked why the Allen University Board of Trustees has remained completely silent during the past two years of turmoil. Unfortunately, we have no answer for that.
One might reasonably expect that, after 40 emails, three newspaper articles, multiple visits from the FBI, the firing of Dr. McNealey, notifications to Dr. Stephen Pruitt at SACSCOC and the Department of Education, ongoing HUD investigations, online videos documenting eight years of Allen Days rallies (56 fundraising events), financial records showing fundraising money never deposited into Allen University’s bank account, and the revelation that the Waverly Building is not owned by Allen University—any board members who attended these rallies would speak up and report the fraud. Yet, to date, the Allen University Board of Trustees has not provided any evidence that it has addressed these allegations.
It is also worth noting that 95 percent of board meetings have been conducted over Zoom, and records of these meetings are accessible through legal channels.
We would also like to clarify our use of the term Anonymous. We are not referring to an individual hiding behind a computer. We are the group Anonymous, a collective dedicated to exposing wrongdoing and promoting transparency. Below is an introduction to our collective and mission.
*********************************************************************************************************************
The Cover-Up Associated With The Annual Allen Days Rallies: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtFOb_Kf7TI
In September 2024, after Bishop Davis had arrived in the 7th District, the millions of dollars raised during the annual Allen Days Rallies were reportedly still held in a South Carolina bank account. Prior to his first conference, Bishop Davis had a private conversation with Dr. McNealey in which he acknowledged that he was aware Allen University had never received the millions of dollars raised at previous conferences.
The reason for this meeting was that Bishop Davis was aware that reporters were present at his first conference rally and that a newspaper outlet had already published a report regarding the missing funds from the Allen Days rallies.
During that conversation, Bishop Davis stated that he knew Allen University had not received the funds and indicated that the money was being held for the institution. Dr. McNealey explained that he had occasionally requested $30,000 to $60,000 from the funds. He further stated that even if Allen University had received the total amount raised annually, it would only cover two or three payroll cycles for the university, which he indicated totalled nearly $700,000 per month. Notably, there was no mention of the students at Allen University, who were intending beneficiaries of the approximately $1.5 million raised annually for scholarships and other student-related needs. Instead, the focus of the discussion was solely on payroll.
Bishop Davis then stated that, moving forward, he wanted the funds allocated as a line item to Allen University, and that Dr. McNealey could use the funds as he “saw fit.” During the same conversation, Bishop Davis indicated that he could “handle the Board,” even after acknowledging that several board members were concerned about the allegations and were considering leaving the Board.
The central issue arises from the decision to provide Allen University with $1 million in an apparent effort to quiet Dr. McNealey. If the funds raised during the Allen Days fundraisers had truly been preserved for the benefit of Allen University, then the full amount donated by supporters should have been transferred to the university. However, there was a significant problem—the funds were no longer available. This ultimately led Bishop Davis to contact the National AME Church and report that the funds had been taken.
The Evidence:
We have in our possession a complete recording of the conversation referenced above, as well as documented intel identifying the exact date the funds left the bank account in South Carolina. While Bishop Davis later provided what appeared to be a heartfelt public interview, the statements made during that interview do not align with the facts surrounding the disappearance of the millions raised for Allen University.
Citizens For Justice
Allen University Students Launch Online Protest Campaign In Search Of 8 Million Dollars Scholarship Funds
Allen University Students Launch Online Protest Campaign In Search Of 8 Million Dollars In Scholarship Funds
COLUMBIA, SC / Boston Herald / September 13, 2024 / a bold move, students at Allen University have initiated an online protest campaign. They are reportedly planning a 45-day non-stop social media campaign designed to flood the president's office and the Board of Trustees with emails demanding answers about what they allege are missing scholarship and grant funds. The protest comes amid a growing controversy involving university president Dr. Ernest McNealey and the disappearance of millions of dollars meant for student scholarships, grant funding, and a damaging recent news report, backed by emails, placing the president in the center of a HUD falsifying document scandal.
The controversy, which has allegedly been brewing for weeks, reached a boiling point after allegations surfaced that substantial sums raised during AME Church conferences-designated for Allen University scholarships-have not been accounted for. Students, many from low-income backgrounds, now allegedly face the possibility of losing their ability to continue their education due to alleged cuts in financial aid.
One student, identified only as K., expressed the frustration allegedly felt by many: "I grew up in Carol City, and my family makes less than $30,000 a year. It was a big struggle just to get here, and my family and church put in everything they could to help me get an education. But now, I'm hearing that Dr. McNealey has been stealing money that's supposed to help students like me, and I'm furious."
The allegations suggest that over $8 million allegedly raised in the past eight years at AME Church conferences may not have reached the university or its students. This revelation has led to questions about where the money has allegedly gone and why scholarships are allegedly being cut despite such substantial funds allegedly being raised.
An alumnus, A. Johnson, allegedly voiced their outrage in an email: "I've seen them announce over $130,000, sometimes even $180,000 in cash and checks raised at these conferences-not counting online giving and Cash App donations. Just this year alone, there was allegedly nearly $800,000 raised at the meetings. And you want to tell us the school isn't getting this money?"
The scandal allegedly extends beyond scholarship funds to encompass questions about the management of federal grants and tax credits related to the Waverly Project, a renovation of a historic campus building. Students and alumni are allegedly demanding transparency about the ownership and financial arrangements surrounding this project, with some alleging that Dr. McNealey may be personally benefiting from these deals.
In response to the mounting pressure and alleged lack of answers from the administration, students are allegedly taking matters into their own hands. "We're fed up with this, and we're mobilizing for a sit-in and a boycott until we see real change. We want Dr. McNealey out!" declared K. in their impassioned email.
The students' online protest campaign allegedly aims to disrupt business as usual until their demands for transparency and accountability are met. They are calling for:
1. A full accounting of all funds allegedly raised for scholarships in recent years.
2. An explanation of why scholarship funds have allegedly been cut despite successful fundraising efforts.
3. The immediate reinstatement of allegedly cut scholarships.
4. Clarification on how the Board allegedly allows the President to own the Waverly-Clyburn Building.
5. A change in leadership, including calls for Dr. McNealey's resignation.
The protest has allegedly garnered support from alumni and community members, with over 900 followers allegedly backing the students' cause. The controversy has also allegedly attracted the attention of national media, with reports indicating that over 50 news outlets have allegedly contacted organizers for more information.
Students are allegedly standing firm in their resolve, even in the face of potential retaliation. As K. stated, "We've also heard that if we boycott, Dr. McNealey might try to kick us out of school. Let me be clear: if that happens, we will sue! We have rights, and we're not going to be scared into silence."
As the online protest allegedly gains momentum, the future of many Allen University students allegedly hangs in the balance. With their education and financial stability allegedly at stake, these students are demanding more than just answers-they're fighting for their future and the integrity of an institution they once trusted.
Feds Freeze millions intended for Allen University campus project, questioning invoices
By Glenn Smith and Adam Parker gsmith@postandcourier.com aparker@postandcourier.com
Aug 2, 2024
COLUMBIA — Federal officials have frozen funding for an expensive effort to transform a historic Black hospital building into a multipurpose campus venue at Allen University, raising questions about how the capital project was managed and its impact on the private school's finances.
Renovations to the former Good Samaritan-Waverly Hospital, which opened in 1952 during the period of legal segregation and operated until 1973, were completed late last year when the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development put the brakes on $4.3 million in grant money expected for the rehab. That's because Allen officials have been unable to provide HUD with receipts needed to document the work that was done, according to HUD and correspondence obtained by The Post and Courier.
The site has been open for months. But the shortfall in grant funds placed a lingering financial strain on the small school at the same time it is dealing with a wave of departures among people in key administrative positions, according to two sources close to the matter. Allen's enrollment stood at 657 in 2022, according to the latest data available from the S.C. Commission on Higher Education.
HUD confirmed to the newspaper that it had rejected four invoices submitted by Allen in November due to the historically Black university's "inability to provide adequate source documentation" to support the expenditures. There were also indications that some of the work occurred outside the window for the grant, a HUD spokesperson said.
Allen has until 2030 to gain access to the money, provided that it can hand over the necessary financial paperwork. But HUD has heard nothing from the school since the beginning of this year, the HUD spokesperson said.
The Waverly-Clyburn Building at Allen University.
Dub Taylor, Allen's vice president for institutional advancement, told The Post and Courier the renovated building has been a beneficial addition to Allen's offerings. But he said the school would have no comment on the HUD grant, its financial status or personnel issues at the school, which is affiliated with the African Methodist Episcopal Church.
The newspaper also reached out Aug. 1 to Allen President Ernest McNealey and AME South Carolina Bishop Samuel L. Green, who chairs Allen's board, but neither responded to the inquiries.
The Waverly Project, as it was called, resulted in a repurposed structure that preserved and improved the former Good Samaritan-Waverly building, which was a cornerstone of Black life in the state capital. It was the only place in town that trained Black nurses and one of the only hospitals in Columbia to serve African Americans. Today, it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The project recalls the building's history, while transforming its space to house:
-
The Boeing Institute on Civility, to include a permanent memorial for the nine victims of the 2015 Emanuel AME Church shooting
-
The School of Education
-
The Dickerson-Green Theological Seminary
-
The Waverly Wall Museum Portrait Display
-
The Dominion Energy Palmetto African American Hall of Fame
Dominion Energy donated $500,000 to the nearly $11 million project in 2020. Boeing pledged $1.5 million. In 2021, the Palmetto Citizens Federal Credit Union donated $100,000.
Finding itself still short of money, Allen University solicited U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn’s intervention in securing the HUD grant.
The powerful South Carolina Democrat, who sits on Allen's board, inserted an earmark into an omnibus spending bill passed by Congress and signed into law in March 2022. It gave Allen $4.29 million meant for the Waverly Project. Then, in 2023, he took steps in an appropriations bill to make sure the money would remain available and that Allen's options for using it would be more flexible. That reportedly was the end of his involvement with the project.
The building was later renamed the Waverly-Clyburn Building in his honor, and a bronze statue of the congressman was erected outside.
Clyburn's office had no comment to offer on the project's funding issues.
Everything seemed on track until HUD balked at turning over the grant money late last year, according to emails obtained by The Post and Courier. That correspondence indicates the school hit a wall when it tried to submit invoices for work done prior to the grant period.
“The funds were channeled through HUD, and during faith-killing conversations with the staff there, the realization that we were seeking reimbursement rather than allocation for a new project was finally acknowledged,” McNealey wrote on Nov. 8, 2023, to one of the contractors.
The school had initially submitted invoices using "documentation that matched the real phases and pay apps” prepared by the contractor. Those invoices were rejected. McNealy's email indicated that an Allen administrator then prepared new "invoices" to conform to the HUD-approved application period, though it is unclear from the correspondence when precisely that work was done. He then asked the project's contractor to sign off on the revised invoices as soon as possible.
HUD subsequently asked for itemized receipts to support those adjusted invoices, which apparently put the school in a bind.
A reporter called GMK Associates — the lead contractor — on Aug. 1 seeking more details about what transpired, but a message was not immediately returned.
In the end, HUD notified Allen officials in December that the new invoices were insufficient and that funds would be withheld until more documentation is provided.
The mix-up, along with recent staff turnover, has increased the challenges for McNealey, Allen's fourth president since 2010. He had previously served as president of Stillman College, another historically Black college institution in Tuscaloosa, Ala.
During his 16-year tenure at Stillman, McNealey managed an ambitious capital campaign on campus and saw the school earn its first-ever ranking among the top tier of comprehensive colleges in the South, The Tuscaloosa News reported. But he was also knocked by some alumni and faculty who blamed his leadership for the departure of staff, financial difficulties and declining enrollment, the paper reported.
Learn How To Make A Difference
01
Educate yourself about social justice issues you’re passionate about and research what is being done about them.
02
Practice Social Solidarity: Support others and challenge oppressive systems.
03
Take positive action in your own community & harness the power of social media.
Up Coming Online Features
