Overview
A three‑month investigation into more than two dozen allegations against First Nations University of Canada’s president concluded with a damning assessment of her leadership. The Deloitte Legal report described a workplace culture divided into “in‑group” and “out‑group” dynamics and concluded that President Jacqueline Ottmann fostered what investigators called an “empire building” environment that undermined governance and accountability.
In tandem with the Deloitte study, Ottmann fired the institution’s vice‑president of finance and administration, Jason Wong, while the report was still being finalized in mid‑2023. A separate confidential draft—provided to CBC—suggested the firing may have been retaliatory and could chill other employees from raising concerns in good faith. CBC later obtained the full report and the Wong filing findings, which indicate a majority of allegations against Ottmann were substantiated on the balance of probabilities.
Key findings: empire, nepotism and control gaps
The Deloitte assessment identified nine instances of nepotism, including appointments of relatives to roles without appropriate conflict disclosures or competitive processes. The report notes Ottmann hired a first cousin and a distant cousin into positions at the university, and she brought in close associates, such as a colleague who later served as vice‑president for university relations, without following standard hiring procedures.
More troubling, investigators found Ottmann bypassed the board and policy requirements to create a new VPUR position and directly appoint a senior staff member, paying a salary outside the established grid ($119,000–$179,000) and then inserting a lucrative payout clause upon termination. Such actions, taken without explicit board approval, undermined the university’s internal controls and governance framework.
The report described this leadership style as “endemic,” with decisions made as fait accompli rather than through consultative processes. It also called into question Ottmann’s candor and awareness of the responsibilities attached to her role in ensuring sound management and oversight.
Financial controls and governance concerns
Beyond personnel matters, the Deloitte review highlighted significant financial control failures. It cited inconsistencies in expense reporting—duplications, alcohol expenses, and the misallocation of a reimbursement that Ottmann later repaid—as well as a 2022–23 overage of more than $200,000, largely tied to hiring activity that did not receive timely board authorization.
According to Deloitte, these patterns reflect a broader governance problem: leadership that did not consistently engage with governance processes, resulting in a culture where policy compliance was not prioritized and where oversight mechanisms were bypassed or weakened.
The whistleblower case and board reactions
The firing of Wong occurred during Deloitte’s investigation and has been described in confidential materials as potentially retaliatory. The implications extend beyond one incident, raising concerns about workplace climate and the willingness of staff to report concerns in good faith.
On the public side, the board’s stance has been divided. Allan Adam, a former board member, argued for Ottmann’s dismissal, warning that political interference could again threaten the university. In contrast, the board’s current chair, Sherry Saevil, publicly expressed confidence in Ottmann after the review and emphasized ongoing monitoring, while declining to discuss the confidential findings.
Governance history and the FSIN framework
First Nations University of Canada (FNUniv) has long operated within a complex governance framework inherited from the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN) and related provincial and federal funding streams. Established in 1976 as Saskatchewan Indian Federated College, the institution underwent several governance reforms amid concerns about political interference. The FSIN Act and subsequent governance changes have shaped the board’s composition and oversight expectations. The 2022 changes to the FSIN Act, which restructured board membership, underscored ongoing tensions between Indigenous leadership and academic governance.
What’s next for FNUniv?
The Deloitte findings, the Wong firing, and the evolving board dynamics come as the university continues to navigate governance reform and funding relationships with government partners. Critics warn that political interference remains a threat to stability, potentially repeating past governance challenges. Supporters argue the institution must restore confidence through accountability and transparent governance practices that align with Indigenous sovereignty and academic integrity.
As FNUniv moves forward, observers say the focus should be on strengthening policy adherence, restoring board independence, and rebuilding trust among students, faculty, and Indigenous communities served by the university. The path ahead will likely hinge on demonstrable governance reforms, ongoing oversight, and clearer delineations of executive authority within the FSIN framework and the broader Canadian higher‑education landscape.
Conclusion
The Deloitte report casts a harsh light on a leadership era at FNUniv, raising questions about governance, accountability, and the protection of whistleblowers. Whether the university can weather this controversy and emerge with a more robust, transparent governance model remains to be seen, but the events underscore the enduring challenge of balancing Indigenous governance with rigorous academic administration.
