HOUSTON — First, there was the letter from a whistleblower, claiming the institution’s accounting was crooked.

Some of the institution’s employees also worked for a related entity, and were well compensated there, which created a conflict of interest.

An investigation was ordered, just a preliminary one, to see if a full investigation was needed. The investigators, however, concluded the rules “were generally adhered to” and the transactions “were uniformly approved by… professionals as well as the Chief Accounting and Risk Officers.” Since “nobody has reason to believe that (the accounting) is inappropriate,” there was no need for a “further widespread investigation,” the investigators concluded, although they admitted “bad cosmetics.”