Score:   1
Docket Number:   D-DC  1:18-cr-00083
Case Name:   USA v. POAWUI
  Press Releases:
            WASHINGTON – Two owners and an employee of for-profit, non-accredited schools were sentenced during the last two days for bribing a public official at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in exchange for the public official’s facilitation of over $2 million in payments that were supposed to be dedicated to providing vocational training for military veterans with service-connected disabilities. 

            Albert Poawui, 41, of Laurel, Md., was the owner of Atius Technology Institute (“Atius”), a school purporting to specialize in information technology courses.  Sombo Kanneh, 29, of McLean, Va., was Poawui’s employee at Atius.  Michelle Stevens, 57, of Waldorf, Md., was the owner of Eelon Training Academy, a school purporting to specialize in digital media courses.

            Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Jessie K. Liu for the District of Columbia, Assistant Director in Charge Nancy McNamara of FBI’s Washington Field Office and Special Agent in Charge Kim Lampkins of U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General (OIG) Mid-Atlantic Field Office made the announcement.

            All three defendants were sentenced by U.S. District Judge John D. Bates of the District of  Columbia.  Poawui was sentenced to serve 70 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release and ordered to pay $1.5 million in restitution to the VA.  Kanneh was sentenced to serve 20 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release and was ordered to pay $113,227.30 in restitution to the VA and to forfeit $1.5 million.  Stevens was sentenced to serve 30 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release and ordered to pay $83,000 in restitution to the VA and to forfeit $83,000.

            James King, the VA official who all three defendants bribed, has pleaded guilty to bribery, wire fraud, and falsification of documents, and will be sentenced on Friday, Feb. 15. 

            The Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) program is a VA program that provides disabled U.S. military veterans with education and employment-related services.  VR&E program counselors advise veterans under their supervision which schools to attend and facilitate payments to those schools for veterans’ tuition and necessary supplies.

            According to admissions made in connection with Poawui and Kanneh’s pleas, in or about August 2015, Poawui and King agreed that Poawui would pay King a seven percent cash kickback of all payments made by the VA to Atius.  In exchange, King steered VR&E program veterans to Atius regardless of the veterans’ educational needs or interests and notwithstanding their repeated complaints about the poor quality of education at Atius.

            Between August 2015 and December 2017, Poawui, King, and the scheme’s other participants caused the VA to pay Atius approximately $2,217,259.44.  Poawui paid King over $155,000 as part of the illicit bribery scheme.  These bribery payments were hand-delivered by Poawui or Kanneh to King or King’s assistant, who was a veteran enrolled in the VR&E program.  Kanneh admitted that she routinely moved money between Atius’s bank accounts to facilitate bribe payments to King.

            Poawui also admitted that he made numerous false representations to the VA to enhance the scheme’s profits.  For example, Poawui certified to the VA that veterans attending Atius were enrolled in up to 32 hours of class per week, when in fact he knew that Atius offered a maximum of six weekly class hours.  After the VA initiated an administrative audit of Atius, Poawui and King took steps to conceal the truth about earlier misrepresentations they had made to the VA.

            According to admissions made in connection with Stevens’ plea, she created Eelon Training Academy after learning about the VR&E program from King.  In or about September 2016, King facilitated the first tuition payment from the VA to Eelon.  Shortly after receiving this payment, King told Stevens that she should give him seven percent of the monies paid by the VA to Eelon.  King proceeded to steer veterans under his supervision to Eelon regardless of their resistance to attending Stevens’ school.

            Stevens admitted to later making two cash payments of $1,500 to King in furtherance of her scheme to bribe King in exchange for King sending veterans under his supervision to Eelon and facilitating the VA’s payments to Stevens.  In total, Stevens received approximately $83,000 from the VA for education that she purported to provide to veteran students.  Stevens submitted invoices to the VA amounting to no less than $300,000 for the tuition and equipment of seven students, but was not paid the balance of the invoice amount due to the VA’s ongoing investigation into Eelon following complaints by students about the poor quality of education. 

            In an effort to procure the outstanding payments from the VA, Stevens made numerous fraudulent misrepresentations to the VA, and maintained fraudulent student files in the event of an audit by the VA.             For example, Stevens emailed to the VA an “attendance” sheet for eight students.  The attendance sheet was created by Stevens and included handwritten check marks purporting to represent the dates that the students attended class.  In fact, as Stevens well knew, the students had not attended class on many of those dates nor was class even held on many of those dates. 

            Poawui, Kanneh, and Stevens’ sentences are the result of an ongoing investigation by the FBI’s Washington Field Office and the Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Inspector General.  Trial Attorney Simon J. Cataldo of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney David Misler of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia are prosecuting the case. 

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qSjXfyHjyc2rFtmN_anypOXtRaEEu-drHtQ5B7GtWrI
  Last Updated: 2023-10-14 03:41:03 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E