FORMER director of the Carl Rattray Staff College Dr Christall Byfield has challenged the adverse findings of the Integrity Commission (IC) following its probe into allegations of irregularities and conflict of interest at the institution.

In the report, which was tabled in the House of Representatives on Tuesday, the IC outlined several irregularities in certain processes utilised by the Department of Correctional Services (DCS)/Carl Rattray Staff College, as well as conflict of interest on the part of Dr Byfield in relation to procurement of goods.

Among the allegations is that Dr Byfield hired her mother, Debbie Parsons-Morris, principal of St Ann’s Bay Infant School, to ratify documents during a curriculum development and training project.

It is also alleged that Dr Byfield hired her friends, Javan Anderson and Leonie Reid, to participate in the same project; and that Dr Byfield is affiliated with a business known as Grove Choice in Golden Grove, St Ann, which occasionally supplies Carl Rattray Staff College with goods and food for training courses.

However, in an e-mail sent on June 11, 2024, addressed to the IC’s Director of Investigation Kevon Stephenson, among others, Dr Byfield — in justifying the involvement of her mother in a curriculum development project at the institution — said their relationship was never concealed and that the staff knew her mother for her contribution as a trainer who delivered several sessions to the staff free of charge.

“My mother’s involvement was transparent and in good faith. Any implications of misconduct are unfounded and unfair,” she said.

Dr Byfield explained that she was among several individuals who developed the curriculum for Correctional Services, previously completed by HEART Trust/NSTA.

She said that at the end of the project she reached out to head of TVET (Technical & Vocational Education Training) at the University of Technology, Jamaica for assistance with external checks and balances on the documents created during development.

“Due to his limited availability, I asked my mother, Mrs Morris, to assist free of cost… It is important to note my mother and I partook in the curriculum development training for over three months at VTDI [Vocational Training Development Institute] in person, also attended by Senior Director Althea Davis, Lygia Martin, and Noel Beckford. I categorically remember my mom during her introduction, [saying] she was pulled in training by her daughter.

“My mother was selected and publicly acknowledged for her support to the staff college during the 2019 Carl Rattray staff party along with executives Ms Joyce Stone and Althea Davis. The project team also felt that her guidance and mentoring support during the project deserve special recognition. The team also recognised me for my support which was acknowledged at the February 5, 2021 project closing ceremony,” Dr Byfield further explained.

She argued that while ignorance of the law is no excuse, she did not know she would need to declare anything “as my mom’s relationship with the department was outside of our relationship as mother and daughter, as well as there being no intention for her to be paid as every other time she assisted at the college was voluntary work.

“Even so, I believe my supervisor, Mrs Althea Davis, knowing fully well she was my mother, should have guided me through the process if she found there was a conflict of interest,” she said.

Dr Byfield also rejected allegations of circumventing the procurement procedures and unilaterally selecting vendors for services and goods at the college, noting that the decision to purchase from Grove Choice was made by the DCS with full knowledge and support from the Procurement Unit and the senior director of human resource management and administration.

But the IC concluded that in terms of the allegation regarding the selection of individuals to participate in the curriculum development and training project held at Carl Rattray Staff College in 2020, a conflict of interest arose as a consequence of the relationship between Byfield and her mother, whom she recommended to participate in the project.

“The DI further concludes that this conflict of interest concern was actualised due to the failure on the part of Ms Byfield, and other officers of the college, who were aware of the existing relationship, and who failed to adhere to established policies, particularly, Section 10 of the DCS Code of Discipline and Section 4.2.9 of the Staff Orders for Public Service. Both policies prescribe the manner in which conflicts of interest ought to be managed and the responsibility on the part of those concerned to, inter alia, make the necessary disclosures/declarations.

“The DI concludes that the DCS, having paid Ms Christall Byfield an honorarium for work/services…which fell within the scope of her duties as director of Carl Rattray Staff College, acted contrary to Section 6.7.4 of the Staff Orders for Public Service,” said the report.

“The DI further concludes that the payments made to Ms Byfield were irregular and should not have been made. Steps should therefore be taken to recover the amounts paid in the foregoing regard,” the report added.

“Still on the point but slightly separately, the DI acknowledges that the work may well have been done by Ms Byfield, and depending on the circumstances, additional compensation may have been necessary; notwithstanding, honorarium, by definition, was not the appropriate scheme under which such a payment should have been made to her.”

In terms of the allegation regarding conflict of interest in the purchase of goods from Grove Choice by Carl Rattray Staff College, the DI concluded that during the period February 10, 2021 to September 29, 2021, the DCS engaged the company to purchase goods valued at just over $1.2 million.

“The DI concludes that as it relates to the purchase of food supplies from Grove Choice by the DCS and the Carl Rattray Staff College, there is evidentiary material to indicate that this process was replete with irregularities,” said the report which argued that a conflict of interest existed between Byfield and Veron Bryan, owner of Grove Choice, which could reasonably be inferred to have influenced the engagement of the firm.

The DI further noted that in coming to his conclusion, it was noted that Dr Byfield was given significant latitude to select/recommend a supplier to provide the goods, and as a result, she selected/recommended Grove Choice.

It pointed out the Grove Choice had only two Government customers, Carl Rattray Staff College and St Ann’s Bay Infant School, whose principal was Dr Byfield’s mother.

According to the report, e-mail correspondence between Dr Byfield and a representative of PriceSmart and the other documents extracted from her work computer, confirm that she held the position of purchasing manager at Grove Choice when it was awarded the contract to supply the staff college.

Among its many recommendations, the IC said as it relates to the “questionable conduct” of Dr Byfield, the DCS should apply such sanctions as it deems necessary and appropriate, “having regard to the seriousness of the referenced conduct and to demonstrate to its members and the public, that such conduct is inconsistent with the standard of behaviour expected from holders of public office”.

The DI said his recommendation is premised on Dr Byfield’s failure to appropriately treat with the conflict of interest situation which arose by virtue of her connection with the proprietor of Grove Choice, and several other individuals, including her mother.