Join the GOOGLE +Rubber Room Community
Showing posts with label Special Commissioner of Investigation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Special Commissioner of Investigation. Show all posts

Sunday, August 22, 2021

NYC Department of Education Settles With Four Students Who Claimed They Were Sexually Abused at Their School.

 

Tweed- NYC Department of Education 

The Office of Special Investigations is a unit of the NYC DOE's Office of General Counsel where so-called "investigations" are anything but that. We have been writing about OSI for a very long time, and we have seen proof at 3020-a hearings of exactly what misconduct by this agency looks like. OSI never investigates students, only staff, educators, and parents. Online Occurrence Reports System (OORS) reports go nowhere but to the desk drawer of an administrator.

I will give you a few examples:

A teacher gives a high school girl in his physical education class a failing grade. Soon after, a complaint of sexual abuse is filed against him by this girl. The complaint is sent to first the Special Commissioner of Investigation (SCI), then SCI randomly hands the case to OSI. The OSI "investigator" comes to the school and talks with the principal, who tells this "investigator" what to find and whom to interview. The principal wants the teacher removed from the school to please the parents, and show that "perverts" are not allowed to teach. Whether there is any truth to the allegation is not considered.

The "investigator" is given a room where he/she "interviews" the students sent there by the principal. The students/staff chosen to be interviewed often write statements or sign statements written for them, substantiating whatever "crime" the principal wants to be proven. Statements that have too many details about the incident and how the teacher was not guilty of doing anything (exactly what the principal does not want in the final report substantiating the misconduct) are not put into the report, lost, or ripped up.

The "investigator" hands his/her handwritten notes to an attorney or higher up at OSI who writes the report based upon what the principal wants to prove, and the alleged 'crime' is substantiated, if that is what the principal wants or was told by the Superintendent or Chancellor's rep. that that's what they want.

Then the principal calls in the teacher who allegedly committed the 'crime' and has a disciplinary meeting. At this meeting, the principal and/or UFT Rep. may tell the teacher "this may lead to your termination" and/or "this will be a letter to file, don't worry". The teacher is led to believe that there is no need to write a rebuttal, because this is the end of it. Make note of the fact that nothing the accused teacher says is heard ("listened to" is different than "being heard"), and no amount of "I am innocent" "I did not do this" will make any difference. The accused teacher should write a detailed rebuttal and send it to everyone at the meeting by the next day, or within a few days. No one will tell you this from the UFT.

These lies told to the accused at the disciplinary meeting help the lawyer at the District to craft Technical Assistance Conference (TAC) memos, which become charges. The lawyers at the Office of Legal Services (NYC DOE Office of General Counsel) send the "Notice of Determination of Probable Cause Pursuant to Education Law 3020-a" to the principal (or, sometimes the Superintendent) to sign but not date. The principal sends the signed fraudulent notice back to the lawyer writing the charges, who dates all the papers and takes the rest of the papers (i.e. "Rights of Tenured Educators" ) off a shelf. 

The teacher who was accused of wrongdoing is served the charges, re-assigned to a rubber room, and within 10 days must submit his/her request to the UFT for a 3020-a hearing or be voted out and terminated by the Panel For Educational Policy (PEP). All this occurs despite the fraudulent charging procedure without proper determination of probable cause by the PEP in an Executive Session, which is kept secret. Why? Because both the NYC DOE and the UFT have kept the fraud going for 20 years since Bloomberg put the NYC DOE under Mayoral control. If either the NYC DOE or UFT agrees that the charging process is illegally done, then what happens to all the 3020-a cases brought to a hearing in NYC? (Outside NYC, all charges have a vote on probable cause by the school board before the charges are served on the accused educator, as cited in Education Law 3020-a(2)(a)).

The lies of the charging process are held onto and pursued against the interests of the accused educator as part of the goal to get rid of tenure. Thus, the fraud of OSI doing any "real" investigations was never planned or allowed, unless the accused knows someone in the political sphere of the DOE or NYC/federal government. It's always a matter of who you know, not what you know. Under no circumstances could the NYC DOE allow charged educators to go free or be found not guilty after a complaint is made by a staff member, parent or child.

See previous posts:

The Chancellor's Office of Special Investigations (OSI) Mess




Secret Emails About Office of Special Investigations Being in Chaos 2014




BY 

The New York City Department of Education has settled a case with four students who claim the school system failed to protect them against sexual harassment and assault, according to a settlement brief filed in the U.S. District Court of Eastern New York on Friday. Along with a $700,000 monetary settlement split amongst the plaintiffs, the education department also agreed to reform how it investigates and responds to allegations of sexual assault.

“I want justice for everybody,” said the mother of “Jane Doe,” a student with autism who alleged she was raped by a classmate in a school stairwell in the Bronx in 2018.

“Due to that traumatic event, my child suffers every day,” the mother said in an interview with WNYC/Gothamist. She added that the settlement won’t “cure” what happened to her child, but it may prevent others from suffering.

Legal Services NYC filed the suit representing four female students of color with disabilities in spring 2019. Their names have been withheld because of their ages and the nature of the incidents. At the time of the assaults, the students ranged from ages 12 to 18.

Jane Doe and another plaintiff alleged they were raped by classmates after harassment that intensified over months. Two other plaintiffs claimed they were taunted, groped and assaulted by other students.

The suit alleges that, even though the students had been repeatedly harassed by their peers leading up to the assaults, the schools did not intervene effectively, investigate adequately or notify parents in a timely manner. The education department’s “indifference and inaction” denied students their right to education under Title IX and the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the lawsuit read.

The education department had already tightened some policies. In fall 2019, it rolled out new regulations expanding the definition of what constitutes sexual harassment, explaining how administrators should conduct investigations, and outlining some supports for students who come forward. The New York City Council increased funding in the Fiscal Year 2020 city budget to pay for additional Title IX liaisons tasked with overseeing investigations at the borough level. The education department also ramped up training for thousands of staff members, including school-based “Sexual Harassment Prevention Liaisons.”

The new settlement seeks to strengthen those regulations even more. They would make it easier for parents to escalate complaints. They detail the steps school staff must take to inform parents when an alleged incident occurs. They enable students to be transferred from a school because of alleged sexual harassment. And they offer more specifics on how schools should support survivors, including considering trauma when crafting a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP).

“Every student deserves to feel safe, welcomed, and affirmed in their school and there is zero tolerance for sexual and gender-based harassment of any kind at the DOE,” education department spokesperson Katie O’Hanlon said in a statement. “We have made it easier to report harassment and provided more robust trainings for staff so that the strongest safeguards are in place for all students, especially for our students with disabilities.”

Attorneys for the plaintiffs lauded the changes.

“We believe this settlement will better equip school personnel to respond to the trauma of bullying and sexual violence, and will provide critical information to students and families about their rights under the law,” said Amy Leipziger, Senior Staff Attorney at Queens Legal Services.

“These landmark policy reforms will finally force the DOE to recognize that students who experience the disabling impacts of sexual violence, bullying, and trauma are protected under federal disability law and are entitled to receive special education supports and other interventions,” said Katrina Feldkamp, a Staff Attorney at Bronx Legal Services.

The mother of “Jane Doe” said her daughter, now 17, remains traumatized.

“She has her breakdowns,” said the mother. “She can’t focus as she did before. She lost a lot of interest in a lot of things, she’s depressed, she has nightmares.”

“Money will not bring peace to our life,” she added. “We need action.”

Saturday, July 10, 2021

Maspeth HS Principal Khurshid Abdul-Mutakabbir is Removed For Grade-Fixing and Other Charges of Academic Misconduct

Khurshid Abdul-Mutakabbir

Grade fixing is a city-wide problem. When principals have all the power over staff and employees in their school, and there is no accountability, then there is trouble.

What employees and staff in a school do not realize, is that their prosecution for any or no reason is part of the job for a principal. If a principal wants to get rid of someone, all he/she has to do is give an "Ineffective" rating on the observation report, create a meaningless Teacher Improvement Plan (TIP), and then either discontinue him/her or inform the lawyers at the District or at 52 Chambers Street that TAC memos must be created and the employee(s) charged with 3020-a, if the individual has tenure.

However, this takes a long time. If principals want to get the employee out faster, then all they have to do is have a child or staff member complain that they saw the unwanted educator verbally abusing a student or doing something to a child that they claim is abusive.

The educator will be removed from the school to a rubber room. This reassignment allows that person, if tenured, to remain on salary until a decision is made by an arbitrator at a disciplinary hearing called "3020-a", but as neither CSA nor NYSUT fully defend their members, termination is the usual result.

In order for principals to get away with whatever they want to make the school - of themselves - look good, they must instill fear in the people who work in their building. Fear is power. 

Except when whistleblowers care more about the kids than their careers.

SCI Report on Maspeth HS

Whistleblowers brought down Maspeth HS Principal Khurshid Abdul-Mutakabbir.

Even whistleblowing doesn't always work, as can be seen in the case of Pierre Orbe (pictured below), Tyree Chin, Richard Bost, David Fanning.


DeWitt Clinton Principal Charges Teachers With 3020-a If They Do Not Change 

Student Grades

Nothing happened to Orbe despite his continuous prosecution of teachers until he made a mistake that went outside of his authority and wrote something improper on his Facebook page:

After allegedly posting offensive content on Facebook, Bronx principal faces investigation

See also:

Holden: Grade fraud goes far beyond Maspeth


In sum, extorting grade changing and doing something abusive to a child (whether it is true or not)  is allowed inside the DOE until someone reports it to the police or an outside agency but NOT to the wholly-owned subsidiaries of the DOE, the Office of Special Investigations (OSI) or the Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO). If a staff member reports to either of these agencies then the person who reported it is investigated.

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, Advocatz.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

NYC DOE removes Maspeth HS principal for role in grade-fixing scandal

The Department of Education has removed a Queens principal for his role in a grade-fixing scandal first exposed by The Post in 2019, officials said Thursday.

The DOE said it will seek to terminate deposed Maspeth High School principal Khurshid Abdul-Mutakabbir after investigators substantiated a raft of academic misconduct charges against him.

A group of teachers told The Post in August 2019 that administrators pressured them to pass failing students and that staffers gave out Regents exam answers during the test.

Queens City Councilman Robert Holden led the charge against the misconduct at Maspeth and pressed officials to probe the school for several years.

“It’s good to finally see the principal removed, two years after I helped the Maspeth High School whistleblowers stand up to the corruption and intimidation and break the story,” Holden said. “They came to my office because they had nowhere else to turn. It has taken far too long, because neither the administration nor the DOE was in any hurry to investigate.”

The whistleblowers also reported that kids who did little to no work were graduated via phantom classes and credits.

The Queens Chronicle first reported Abdul-Mutakabbir’s removal Thursday.

“Following DOE’s investigation into Principal Abdul-Mutakabbir’s unacceptable behavior, DOE served him with disciplinary charges and removed him from payroll while we seek to terminate his employment pursuant to state law,” said DOE spokesperson Katie O’Hanlon.

Abdul-Mutakabbir has been removed from his post without pay and the DOE will now begin proceedings to terminate him outright.

“Our schools must have the highest standards of academic integrity, and we are working quickly to bring in new, qualified leadership to Maspeth High School.” O’Hanlon said.

Cynical students called their guaranteed graduations the “Maspeth Minimum,” and the school’s 99 percent graduation rate helped to land it a “Blue Ribbon Award.”

“Teachers are not allowed to fail students,” a staffer told the Post.

Staffers who refused to partake in the academic misconduct were targeted with trumped up disciplinary charges and other forms of retaliation, sources said.

Problematic students were allowed to skip class but still graduate because administrators wanted to maintain a strong passing rate, teachers said.

Holden cautioned that academic fraud is not limited to Maspeth.

“Grade fraud is a systemic problem throughout the city school system and we need state and federal agencies to investigate, including the U.S. Attorney, New York State and U.S. Departments of Education and the FBI. Our educators and our students deserve better,” he said.

Sunday, March 31, 2019

The More Reports Made of NYC DOE Wrongdoing, The Less the Special Commissioner Investigated What Happened

Mayor Bill de Blasio speaks during a press conference at PS 130 on March 11, 2019.
(Jeff Bachner/for New York Daily News)
Now that is an interesting new fact about SCI: more reports mean less investigations.
SCI has long been ridiculed as an investigative agency, so maybe this is a good thing but wait....who is taking on the work?
Oh yes, I forgot. No one.
Just another fun fact about the most corrupt education department in the USA, or maybe the world.

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, Advocatz.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials


 More reports of wrongdoing in NYC schools, but fewer probes opened in 2018



The city’s embattled special commissioner of investigation, which probes waste and wrongdoing in city schools, said Friday it opened far fewer cases in 2018 despite receiving far more reports of malfeasance.
The office received 6,813 complaints of wrongdoing by school staffers in 2018, up from 6,277 in 2017 and 5,287 in 2014, the year Mayor de Blasio took office, according to the report.
But despite the rise in complaints — about such things as teachers having inappropriate relationships with students — the agency opened just 502 cases in 2018, down from 739 cases in 2017.
A spokeswoman for the special commissioner’s office said fewer cases were opened because more were referred to other agencies, including the Department of Education itself.
The spokeswoman said the change in policy was intended to boost efficiency and improve the city’s ability to probe alleged wrongdoing in prekindergarten classes.
The statistics were included in an annual report released by the special commissioner’s office, which is tasked with oversight of the DOE — an agency with a $32 billion annual budget that serves more than 1 million students. The report was just five pages long.
City council members are not pleased with the reduction in special commissioner’s caseload — or the lack of detail in its annual report.
“There are over 32 billion reasons why SCI’s annual report should be more than five pages," said Councilman mark Treyger, who chairs the Education Committee.
 
"And in addition to the fact that they have opened and completed fewer cases than in years past, I still see no evidence in this five-page report of any systemic, proactive investigations to root out waste, fraud and corruption in the largest department in the City of New York,” Treyger said.
 
Treyger and Councilman Ritchie Torres, chair of the investigations committee, said they’d hold hearings on the office’s work.
 
“An office that historically has been shrouded in secrecy is about to face real oversight from the City Council,” Torres said. The Special Commissioner’s office was caught up in a swirl of controversy last year.
Ex-Department of Investigation Commissioner Mark Peters carried out an unauthorized takeover of the agency, and fired Special Investigator Anastasia Coleman.
Peters himself ended up fired by the end of the year — and Coleman, who filed a whistleblower complaint, got her job back.
Torres said the declining output of the office and the lack of systemic investigations shows there was some logic Peters’ effort to bring the office further under DOI’s umbrella, Torres said.
“He was found to be wrong on the law, but he was right on the policy — SCI operating on its own has led to real questions about its performance,“ Torres said. “I suspect SCI would function more effectively were it to be more integrated into DOI at large.”

Saturday, March 31, 2018

Disarray at the NYC Department of Investigation and at Squad 11/DOE, Formerly Special Commissioner of Investigation (SCI)

Re-posted from NYC Public Voice March 31, 2018

Mark Peters, NYC's Commissioner For the Department of Investigation, Fires Anastasia Coleman, Special Commissioner of Investigation (SCI)

There is disarray at the New York City SCI Office,  now called "Squad 11/DOE", that's for sure.  Commissioner Anastasia Coleman was fired on March 28 2018 by Department of Investigation Chief Mark Peters. We already know about the OSI mess with Wei Liu. As active researchers into 3020-a arbitration and  State and Federal Court cases, for now 15 years, we have evidence of the  corruption within the organizations set up to investigate corruption, namely OEO, OSI, and SCI. It's not pretty.

SCI was set up by Executive Order 11, after James Gill, father to former DOI Chief Rose Gill Hearn, issued his "Gill Commission Report" as well as "Investigating the Investigators" (May 26, 2014):

The Gill Commission Report (1990) and the Denial of Due Process Rights By the "Investigators" in the Special Commissioner of Investigation (SCI) Office


How this will all iron out is unknown at this point, but I would love to have a one-to-one chat with Ms. Coleman! Is there a coverup of someone or something?

Just askin'.

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com

Editor, ADVOCATZ.com
Editor, ADVOCATZ
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials 
Mark Peters

Seeking Control, Investigation Chief Fires Schools’ Special Commissioner
The commissioner of New York City’s Department of Investigation, who recently tried to seize control of the agency that polices corruption in the school system, has taken another step in asserting his power, firing the new head of the schools investigation office less than two months into her tenure.

The office, known as the special commissioner of investigation for the New York City School District, investigates allegations of corruption, criminal activity, conflicts of interest and unethical conduct in the 1.1 million-student school system. Though it reports to the investigations department, the agency has largely operated independently since its inception in 1990.

But the investigations commissioner, Mark G. Peters, sought to change that last month, saying the schools office was under his authority. Mr. Peters has also subsumed three other offices into the Department of Investigation: the inspectors general for the New York Police Department, the School Construction Authority and the Health and Hospitals Corporation.

Mr. Peters last month appointed Anastasia Coleman, a former senior assistant district attorney in Brooklyn, to take over the schools investigation office from Special Commissioner Richard J. Condon, who retired late last year. She objected to Mr. Peters’s efforts to restructure the office and eliminate its independence, and had told him and his senior staff that she believed his efforts violated the law, based on the municipal documents that created the office, according to memos, emails and other documents.

On Wednesday, Mr. Peters fired her during a brief meeting, at which he was accompanied by five senior staff members. She was escorted to her office and then out of the building by one of the agency’s armed officers, people briefed on the matter said. He later demoted her top deputy.

On Thursday, Mr. Peters announced her removal to her staff of roughly 60 lawyers, investigators and other employees in a conference room at the special commissioner’s offices. The meeting lasted less than two minutes.

Mr. Peters spoke for less than a minute, according to a recording of the session provided to The New York Times, saying that Ms. Coleman no longer worked for the agency and that he had named one of his deputy commissioners, Susan Lambiase, as the acting head of the office.

Then, with anger rising in his voice, he said: “I expect that everyone in this room will give her their full support and cooperation. Thank you.” After he left, Ms. Lambiasi told the staff that she was looking forward to working with them and went over a few administrative matters, remarks that lasted less than a minute.
Anastasia Coleman
(Linkedin picture)

Ms. Coleman’s removal seems certain to worsen Mr. Peters’ already frayed relationship with Mayor Bill de Blasio, once his good friend. The mayor appointed Mr. Peters in early 2014, after he served as the treasurer for Mr. de Blasio’s first mayoral campaign. Choosing a friend and campaign treasurer to head the agency responsible for rooting out corruption, fraud and abuse in city government raised questions. The questions grew into concerns when Mr. Peters initially resisted recusing himself in 2016 when Mr. de Blasio’s campaign fund-raising activities — activities which did not involve Mr. Peters — came under scrutiny by federal and state prosecutors.

Before her firing, Ms. Coleman had sent a lengthy memo to the city’s top lawyer, Corporation Counsel Zachary W. Carter, detailing her legal arguments and concerns about Mr. Peters’s changes to the schools investigation office. She concluded with a blistering attack on the investigation department’s conduct.

Finally, it is shocking that an agency that prides itself on public integrity and transparency, and presents itself as the enforcer of city rules, would blatantly disregard laws, bully and retaliate against employees, and demonstrate such poor judgment,” she wrote.

“DOI has overstepped its authority by disregarding” the municipal records that created the office, she continued, “and by unilaterally dismantling the existing authority and structure of SCI.”

Her view is shared by the education department, which funds the office and has publicly resisted the changes, and, according to people familiar with the matter, senior City Hall officials.

In an email to Mr. Peters hours before she was fired, Ms. Coleman identified herself as a whistle-blower and noted that the city administrative code protects her and her deputy from adverse personnel actions for raising concerns about “the potential of criminality, wrongdoing, or mismanagement” to the Investigation Department.

Mr. Peters has steadfastly maintained that the changes he has sought to make were lawful, and he told a City Council hearing on Monday that neither he nor anyone from his staff had been contacted by anyone at the Education Department about the matter.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Peters declined to comment on Ms. Coleman’s firing and the demotion of her deputy. Spokesmen for Mr. de Blasio and Mr. Carter also declined to comment.

Some of the alterations Mr. Peters has sought could significantly change the way the office operates. He has sought the power to set salaries, hire and fire, promote and demote, discipline, and assign the duties and responsibilities of all those who work in the schools office.

He has endeavored to change the title of the head of the office from special commissioner of investigation to inspector general, a less prestigious position that is equivalent to more than a dozen other department officials. That was a sticking point for Ms. Coleman, who, according to documents and emails, was told she would hold the more prestigious title when she was interviewed for the post.

Mr. Condon had the authority to sign subpoenas, compel testimony and publish reports. Ms. Coleman was told she did not have those powers, and needed to seek approval from senior officials at the department.

Mr. Peters said the changes would ensure consistency and add little time to investigations.

When he fired her, Mr. Peters gave Ms. Coleman a letter in which he wrote that he had asked earlier in the day for her resignation because of their “intractable disagreement” over the degree of oversight his agency could exercise over the special commissioner of investigation. He disputed her legal interpretation of the municipal documents — an executive order and two Board of Education resolutions — that created the office, arguing that his changes were lawful.

He also wrote that his agency “found her performance lacking,” although that contention appeared to be something of an afterthought, limited as it was to the last two paragraphs of his two-and-a-half page letter.

Mark G. Peters, commissioner of the city Department of Investigation, has tried to take control of the office that polices corruption in the school system. CreditKevin Hagen for The New York Times
Fight to Control Office That Roots Out Corruption in New York Schools
The selection of a new chancellor has dominated education circles in New York City for the last few weeks, but behind the scenes a more prosaic bureaucratic drama was playing out over control of the office that investigates corruption in the 1.1 million-student school system.

It was a municipal scuffle: The commissioner of the city Department of Investigation tried to seize total control of the semiautonomous office that polices corruption in the school system. The Department of Education has since pushed back — hard.

The move by the investigation commissioner, Mark G. Peters, resulted in an unusual legal skirmish between the two agencies, pitting an archaic set of municipal records against a series of new documents drawn up by the investigation department.

On one side was a series of mayoral executive orders, the earliest dating back to 1990, and two Board of Education resolutions of similar vintage, which give the office its authority. On the other was paperwork prepared by Mr. Peters’ staff that would have given him full control. The outgoing schools chancellor, Carmen Fariña, has refused to sign it.

The office, known as the Special Commissioner of Investigation for the New York City School District, investigates allegations of corruption, criminal activity, conflicts of interest and unethical conduct in the system, the largest in the country.

Taking direct control would give Mr. Peters the power to hire and fire, set salaries, promote and demote, discipline, and assign the duties and responsibilities of the investigators and other employees of the special commissioner’s office. One of the legal documents prepared by the Department of Investigation sought Ms. Fariña’s approval for Mr. Peters’s agency to exercise those powers, as well as the authority to assign staff “consistent with the needs of D.O.I.,” according to a copy of the document.

Without her signature, those responsibilities remain with the office of the special commissioner.

Mr. Peters said his actions were prompted by the retirement late last year of Special Commissioner Richard J. Condon. A widely respected former New York Police Department commissioner, Mr. Condon was appointed special commissioner in 2002 and earned the respect of many at the education and investigation departments, and elsewhere in city government.

Mr. Peters has made additional unilateral changes that appear to run afoul of the orders and resolutions, and which, along with his other actions, would largely eliminate the autonomy that the office has had since it was created in 1990 and which has helped enable it to aggressively root out corruption.

He has changed the title of the head of the office from special commissioner of investigation to inspector general, a less prestigious position that is equivalent to more than a dozen other investigation department officials. The old executive orders provide that the special commissioner has the authority to sign subpoenas, compel testimony and publish reports. The new inspector general, Anastasia Coleman, a former senior assistant district attorney in Brooklyn, would not have those powers, and would have to seek approval from senior officials at the department.

Mr. Peters said those changes would ensure consistency and add little time to investigations.

He has also done away with the special commissioner’s separate website, consolidating it with his department’s. In addition, he has changed the reporting structure. Instead of reporting directly to the investigation commissioner, Ms. Coleman will report to an assistant commissioner, who reports to a deputy commissioner, who reports to the first deputy commissioner, who reports to Mr. Peters.

The changes were needed to create uniformity, Mr. Peters said, and so that his agency could take a more systemic look at the Department of Education, the way it has focused on the city’s Department of Correction and the New York City Housing Authority, where the investigation department has looked into on corruption, mismanagement and other problems.

He also contended that an even older executive order, from 1978, gave him the authority to make the changes he has undertaken because the city school system is now under mayoral control.

In recent weeks, the investigation agency has moved quickly to act on the new authority it has sought over the special commissioner’s office, posting a job vacancy notice for an assistant commissioner level job there, which it has attempted to fund through the education department, according to documents and emails.

But the post, chief information security officer, with a salary of $120,000 to $150,000, would serve the investigation department, according to the posting, which said the job would “increase the agency’s overall security posture.”

Mr. Peters said that the education department funding for the position was only temporary.

Toward the end of the interview, he seemed to be loosing patience with questions about his actions in connection with the special commissioner’s office.

“Either people cooperate with our investigations or they don’t,” he said. “Everything else is just noise.”