A whistleblower investigation into hiring practices at the California Department of Education sparked an update to the agency’s nepotism policy. A manager, who served as part of an interview panel, was found to help a “close friend” get a job at CDE.

The employee applied for a job in April 2024. The employee and manager were often seen having lunch and the employee described their relationship as being “like brother and sister,” according to the investigation’s findings, and communicated with human resources to help correct the errors.

The two worked together to fill out parts of the employee’s CalCareer account and helped order the employee’s transcripts, according to the California State Auditor’s findings.

An application process ‘advantage’

After the application was submitted, an analyst in human resources determined it was incomplete. The manager provided the analyst’s contact information to the employee. Both the employee — who was an applicant at the time — and manager then contacted the analyst in hopes of remedying the errors about the employee’s job history, such as dates of employment and hours worked per week.

The analyst’s contact information was not publicly available to all applicants, according to the report, nor are applicants generally informed of an incomplete application status.

After the duo reached out to human resources, the analyst provided the employee with a supplemental job experience form to make adjustments. This did not happen with two other candidates whose applications were deemed incomplete.

“The employee’s close personal relationship with the manager afforded him an advantage that was not made available to other candidates,” the investigation report states.

Dates of employment and hours worked weren’t the only changes made in the supplemental form, according to the report. Email records reviewed by investigators reportedly show the manager completed the form on the employee’s behalf.

The employee told investigators he filled out the form himself while, according to the report, the manager said the employee asked her to fill it out because he was traveling. The manager is accused of adding keywords like “Microsoft Excel” to the application.

“The employee initially told us that he did not use Word or Excel at Employer B and used only Word at Employer A, then he changed his statement after we showed him his supplemental application,” the report states.

The report states the manager denied adding such keywords with the intent of making the employee feel more qualified.

Dates of employment listed in the supplemental form were also different from what investigators found were disclosed in the employee’s interview.

Arranged hiring supervisor introduction

Two weeks before interviews were held — which the manager was on the panel for — the investigation found the manager arranged for the then-applicant to meet with the hiring supervisor.

“During the 30‑ to 45‑minute meeting, the employee discussed his work and military history, was introduced to other staff and was shown the unit’s specialized equipment,” the report states. “No other candidate received this opportunity to meet with the supervisor before the interviews took place.”

The manager joined the interview process at the last minute, according to the report, after another colleague wasn’t able to. She told investigators that she didn’t feel it was wrong to participate because the two weren’t related and the two other panelists’ scores wouldn’t be affected by her.

Investigators determined that wasn’t the case because “both panelists reported directly to the manager” which the report said made “it unlikely that they would go against the opinions of their manager.”

The manager was dismissed, according to CDE’s response listed in the investigation report. It asked the State Personnel Board to void the employee’s appointment. The agency, which didn’t respond to The Sacramento Bee’s inquiry, also updated its nepotism policy to include close relationships.

Hiring someone a manager knows using proper protocols isn’t typically against state policies. A new hiring guide released this summer states existing relationships between candidates and hiring managers is generally considered a merit-based factor. Those known from existing relationships as high performers may get a boost while those with reputations as low performers could be adversely affected.

____

©2026 The Sacramento Bee. Visit at sacbee.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.