Using the information provided in the weekly reading and video provided, create a 5-minute recorded presentation to communicate the results of your data analysis project, including a minimum of two data visualizations, choosing the chart type most appropriate for your message objective.
What are the key insights that you need to communicate with your presentation?
Create visuals (2 min.) necessary to support your conclusions – approving or disproving your hypotheses of relationships between dependent and independent variables.

If available, include feedback from your peers on the discussion board and your instructor before finalizing your visuals for your presentation.
End your presentation with recommendations – how is this information important/useful to inform a data-driven decision?
ISSUES IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION
Vol. 32, No. 1
February 2017
pp. 67–77
American Accounting Association
DOI: 10.2308/iace-51324
A Case Study of Fraud Concerns at a Homeowners’
Association
Constance M. Lehmann
Cynthia D. Heagy
University of Houston–Clear Lake
ABSTRACT: This case is based on a series of actual events in a local homeowners’ association (HOA). Instructors
teaching fraud detection in their courses often use historical cases in which the ‘‘answer’’ to whether fraud has been
committed is known. This case is unique because it is based on real incidents that occurred in an HOA. The case
starts with the inception of the HOA up to the present, at which time the situation is still evolving. Students are
required to recognize the conditions that increase the potential for fraudulent activity in an organization. Then they
must analyze the activities in this particular association to identify the ‘‘red flags’’ that indicate that fraudulent activity
could occur. Finally, students must develop recommendations to mitigate the identified risk areas. After completing
this case, students will be more aware of potential and actual incidents of fraudulent activity and be able to address
how these incidents can be prevented. This knowledge will benefit them in any area of accounting they choose to
pursue. This case can be used in fraud examination, auditing, accounting information systems, and financial
accounting classes.
Keywords: fraud; fraud detection; fraud triangle; ‘‘red ?ags’’; risk assessment; case studies; COSO framework.
Data Availability: Data available from ?rst author.
THE CASE
Inception
T
he EagleBranch subdivision opened in the early 1980s. Located in an upscale suburb of a major metropolitan area, the
subdivision started with plans for 133 custom homes. The common properties of the subdivision included a park with a
playground, a full-sized pool, a baby/wading pool, and a building that housed restrooms and showers. After
approximately 50 homes were sold, the developer created a homeowners’ association called EagleBranch Homeowners’
Association. (The definition and operation of a homeowners’ association are discussed in Appendix A.) Seven homeowners
volunteered to serve—four as officers and members of the board, one as a member of the board, and two as the architectural
control committee. The association needed a president, vice president, secretary, treasurer, and one additional board member to
prevent any tie votes on decisions. Two of these volunteers were a married couple.
These charter officers worked hand in hand with the developer to file an application and the association’s articles of
incorporation with the state. Being the first board members of a new homeowners’ association required a great deal of time to
create the bylaws and policies for the association and to locate and engage service providers to maintain the common
properties. The board members were a congenial group and enjoyed working together. To some extent their meetings were like
a productive social event. Some of the policies and procedures established by the board included the following:
The authors thank Larry Crumbley for his suggestion to write a non-historical fraud case that teaches students to identify red flags. We are grateful to Thao
Nguyen and Hang Vo for their help organizing the feedback data. The authors thank Mattie Porter, Randall Xu, Lane Lambert, Stephen Bukowy, and
Lynn Clements for using the case in their classes and providing feedback to us. We acknowledge the comments and recommendations from M.B.A.
students who pilot-tested the case at the University of Houston–Clear Lake; their contributions improved the recommended responses in the Teaching
Notes. The helpful comments provided by session attendees at the 2014 Forensic and Investigative Accounting Mid-Year Meeting are also appreciated.
The authors also thank the two anonymous reviewers, the associate editor, and the editor for their support and their helpful suggestions that considerably
improved the manuscript.
Editor’s note: Accepted by Lori Holder-Webb.
Submitted: October 2014
Accepted: October 2015
Published Online: October 2015
67
Lehmann and Heagy
68
Treasurer:
A checking account would be opened in the name of EagleBranch Homeowners’ Association. The treasurer would
be on the signature card and be responsible for recordkeeping for the account. All receipts and disbursements of
cash would be made by the treasurer from this account. The treasurer would provide a list of all cash receipts and
disbursements and present it along with the monthly bank statement reconciliations to the board members at their
quarterly meetings.
Annual dues owed by each homeowner would be $450 a year. A notice would be mailed by the treasurer in January of
each year stating the amount due and the due date. A stamped, return envelope addressed to the treasurer would be
included with the notice. Checks would be payable to the EagleBranch Homeowners’ Association. The treasurer would
purchase a stamp to use to endorse checks for deposit to the association’s checking account.
President:
The president would approve cash disbursements. The president would initial invoices as evidence of authorization and
give them to the treasurer to pay.
The president would be responsible for making sure all maintenance work was completed on time and to specifications.
The president would be responsible for calling board/officer meetings as needed. These meetings were usually to discuss
maintenance issues.
Vice President:
The vice president would act in the place of the president in the event of the president’s absence or inability to act and
perform any other duties as requested by the board members.
Secretary:
The secretary would prepare minutes of the board meetings. This person would send the minutes to the members of the
board and provide copies to any association members who requested them.
The secretary would provide nuts and chips at the board meetings. The vice president would bring the beer.
Board Members:
The board members would determine any special assessments or changes in dues.
The board members would decide what maintenance work to do and what service provider to use.
Subsequent Events
By 2002, the five original volunteer board members were ready to pass on their responsibilities. Surprisingly, there had
been no turnover in these positions in the approximately 20 years they had served. The group was dedicated to making their
subdivision a pleasant place to live and enjoyed working together. Also, they were smart enough to realize the better their
subdivision was maintained, the greater the chance their property values would remain stable or even increase.
Gino, an affable resident of the neighborhood who owned a struggling pool business, stepped up to become the new
president of the association. Most of the residents were happy and grateful that someone was willing to volunteer for this
position. To streamline operations and save on the cost of maintaining a post office box for the HOA, Gino had all bank
statements and bills sent to his home address. He was able to quickly hand-pick four volunteers to replace the others, i.e., three
officer/board members and one board member. Gino felt it was important for the volunteer board members to feel comfortable
serving on the board so he made sure that the insurance to limit the liability of the board members was kept up to date. Gino has
remained president of the HOA to the present day. During the summer of 2013, it came to some of the residents’ attention that
not all was well with the HOA. Below is a recount of recent events.
December 2012
Gino held a special meeting for all the homeowners to vote on a 10 percent increase in the annual dues, which had not
increased since 1996. Gino pointed out the costs of maintaining the common areas had increased while dues had not. Also,
repairs were needed to the pools and the playground equipment, all of which had been in use for 27 years. Because swimming
pools were Gino’s area of expertise, he spent most of the meeting talking about the pools. Although the pools appeared in
general to be in good repair, several problems needed to be addressed. The rebar was coming up through the big pool in two
places and in the baby/wading pool in one place. Those needed to be fixed and the pool resurfaced. Several tiles were broken or
loose; the pool needed an acid cleaning; the filter equipment was in danger of failing; pumps were wearing out; and the safety
Issues in Accounting Education
Volume 32, Number 1, 2017
A Case Study of Fraud Concerns at a Homeowners’ Association
69
covers on all the drains needed to be replaced. Also, the baby/wading pool had a leak. The bottom line, according to Gino, was
that without an increase in dues, the pools would have to be filled in.
Gino passed around a list of homeowners’ names with two boxes to the side of each name for a yes or no vote for the dues
increase. The increase passed unanimously.
May 2013
The HOA held a meeting for members of the board and the homeowners. Again, swimming pool issues were the major
topic. Homeowners complained that during the off-season of October to April none of the pool repairs discussed at the
December 2012 special meeting had been done despite an increase in dues to cover them. It was now May and time for the
pools to open so the repairs could not be made for another six months. Gino took this as an insult and a criticism that he was not
doing a good job as president of the association. Gino countered that he had been taking care of the association for several years
with no pay and no show of appreciation from the homeowners. He justified the need for the increase in annual dues by saying
the pool maintenance company, which was not Gino’s company, was charging the HOA $650 per month. He failed to mention
the pool maintenance contract was for only six months per year because no pool maintenance was performed from October to
April. He also pointed out that during the off-season he had the leak in the baby/wading pool fixed and resurfaced at a cost of
$4,000 to the association. Gino stated that the water bills the previous summer were unusually high because of the leak in the
baby/wading pool.
A homeowner suggested that Gino get other homeowners to help him with things like neighborhood beautification and
social activities, whereupon Gino appointed two homeowners to be additional members of the board. One would be an advisor
and the other (who ran a semi-successful website building company) would handle the website. Gino appointed a long-time
HOA board member as the Architectural Control Committee chair.
When a homeowner asked Gino to produce the bylaws for the HOA, Gino waved the homeowner’s concerns away and
said they were ‘‘in his head.’’ The meeting was adjourned without a vote on the new board members and their assignments.
June 2013
A resident who used the pool regularly for lap-swimming exchanged pleasantries with the owner of the maintenance
company on a sunny Saturday morning. During their conversation, the resident found out that the pool maintenance company
had not been paid the $650 per month agreed to orally by the pool company owner and Gino. When the resident complained
about the cost of resurfacing the baby pool by Gino’s pool company, the pool maintenance company owner exclaimed that if
the cost for the job quoted by the resident was correct, then the repair cost approximately four times what it should have. He
told the resident that, to his knowledge, no request for bids had been sent out, and currently his company was trying to repair
the same leak ‘‘fixed’’ by Gino’s company.
A board member who was handling the landscaping contract became frustrated because Gino did not respond to her
requests for records; he held special board meetings without her knowledge; and he made personal attacks against her in emails
sent to other board members. Consequently, she resigned from the board and started airing her concerns to other homeowners.
August 2013
The pool maintenance company stopped servicing the pools due to non-payment from the HOA. The owner of the
company sent copies of his invoices and his notice that he would no longer provide services to the HOA to a concerned resident
who had been trying to determine how and to whom bills were paid. Gino did not respond to requests for records of cash
disbursements, and the new treasurer had neither seen the books nor had been asked to pay any bills. Gino explained he had not
paid the pool company because the company billed some large maintenance repairs that were not cleared by Gino prior to the
repairs being completed. While all this was going on with the pool maintenance company, the landscape company complained
to another resident that payment of its fees had not been made in a timely manner.
Late August 2013
Homeowners discovered Gino had gone before City Council to request a state grant to paint bicycle lanes and parking
spaces along the main road that ran through the subdivision. Gino told members of the City Council he represented the HOA
and that the homeowners agreed to this project. A homeowner who just happened to be at the meeting announced at this same
city council meeting that this was the first he had heard of the project. Nevertheless, after working with a city council member,
Gino was able to get the grant for this project.
Issues in Accounting Education
Volume 32, Number 1, 2017
Lehmann and Heagy
70
Early September 2013
Several concerned homeowners contacted the accounting firm that prepared financial statements for the HOA. The sole
proprietor of the firm lived in the subdivision. She told the concerned homeowners they could come to her office in three days
to review the books, but they would not ‘‘find what they are looking for.’’ The homeowners visited the accounting firm only to
find receipts and checks from the manual ledger missing, payments made to board members without receipts, and purchases
made without justification, e.g., $600 paid to Gino each May for the pool opening activities including the purchase of a new
grill and coolers every year. Other questionable payments included a payment of $250 to the son of one of the board members
for picking up trash in the neighborhood and the purchase of some corrugated metal for the pool area that ended up in the pool
area of a board member’s home. After the homeowners had reviewed the records for about an hour, the accountant demanded
they leave. She turned off the air conditioner and the lights—effectively shutting down their investigation.
The accountant later issued a ‘‘compilation’’ that claimed she was ‘‘not independent’’ and disclaimed the information
provided for her report. This was sent to the concerned homeowners shortly after their visit to her office.
Mid-September 2013
Representatives from 11 families in the neighborhood met to discuss the next steps. They hired a lawyer at their personal
expense who specialized in homeowners’ association disputes. The lawyer suggested the following actions:
1. Do research to determine the legal standing of the HOA and follow up on some of the irregularities found by various
homeowners.
2. Prepare a report and official letters to board members, including Gino, outlining concerns and requesting a response
within ten days.
3. Request minutes of board meetings, audit reports, election results, bank statements, and bids and contracts related to
major maintenance projects.
4. In the event the records are inadequate and/or not produced, send a notice of an intent by the homeowners to file a
lawsuit against the HOA board.
If these actions did not resolve the problems with the HOA, then a potential lawsuit with forcible removal of the board members
might be required. Included in this series of events would be a possible investigation by the district attorney into the alleged
fraudulent activities by the board members.
In the meantime, a homeowner went to the City Council to tell them Gino did not represent the homeowners with regard to
the street striping project as no survey of the homeowners had been made prior to the application for the grant. The City
Council members requested a survey be made of the homeowners before the project moved forward. City Council requested
this because two years prior, the city had to rip out speed bumps in another neighborhood at the city’s expense because the
HOA president improperly claimed to represent the wishes of the homeowners. The city stood to lose either way. If the
homeowners voted against the project, then the grant money would be returned to the State; if the project moved forward
without the proper approval of the homeowners, then the city could incur expenses for removing the paint.
Early October 2013
Gino sent a newsletter to all homeowners advising dues would be increased again pending a series of meetings later that
year to gather votes for the increase. The newsletter announced that bicycle lanes and parking spaces would soon be painted on
the main road into the subdivision. Gino claimed the vote for this project was unanimous by the HOA board.
Meanwhile, the homeowner who had informed the City Council that HOA members had not been given the opportunity to
vote on the street striping project mailed a survey to the homeowners asking if they were for or against the project. More than
half of the 133 property owners responded to the survey. Ninety percent of those were against the project.
Mid-October 2013
The first round of research by the lawyer for the concerned homeowners discovered the following:
The HOA was involuntarily dissolved in 1993 because the HOA board did not file the proper forms. The state forms
were not filed in 1989, and the HOA was dissolved after the four-year grace period expired.
No franchise tax form for the HOA had been filed since 1988, thereby forfeiting status with the state to operate as an HOA.
Forms required by the IRS were missing.
The county had record of the pool property, and the property was in good standing with the county.
The HOA (if it legally existed at all) was out of compliance with the 2013 HOA laws.
Until legally reinstated, any business activity conducted by the HOA was void.
Issues in Accounting Education
Volume 32, Number 1, 2017
A Case Study of Fraud Concerns at a Homeowners’ Association
71
The board members could be personally liable for fraud.
The Next Steps
This scenario is ongoing. A large group of concerned homeowners is meeting regularly with the attorney to determine what
steps to take to revive the association and the integrity of the board. The obvious first step would be a vote by the homeowners
to replace the current board members and elect new members and officers. Next, the board would file all the proper forms with
the state to reinstate the legal standing of the HOA. The bylaws would be revised to clearly define the duties of the board and
the officers and to require some checks and balances in the duties.
CASE REQUIREMENTS
For Use in a Fraud Examination Course or an Auditing Course
1. Apply the fraud triangle to this case. Speculate on the motivation/pressures, opportunity, and rationalization of Gino
and possibly other board members.
2. Identify at least 20 ‘‘red flags’’ for potential fraud in this case, for example, inadequate records. Why were checks
written to board members?
3. Identify internal control weaknesses present in the case and tie them to the elements of the COSO (2013) Internal
Control—Integrated Framework: the control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and
communication, and monitoring.
4. Identify and discuss the practical logistical issues of removing Gino and the other board members.
5. What do you think of the accountant’s behavior? Include in your discussion the responsibility of the accountant.
For Use in an Accounting Information Systems Course
1. Apply the fraud triangle to this case. Speculate on the motivation/pressures, opportunity, and rationalization of Gino
and possibly other board members.
2. Identify at least ten ‘‘red flags’’ for potential fraud in this case, for example, inadequate records. Why were checks
written to board members?
3. Identify internal control weaknesses present in the case and tie them to the elements of the COSO (2013) Internal
Control—Integrated Framework: the control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and
communication, and monitoring.
4. Identify and discuss the practical logistical issues of removing Gino and the other board members.
5. What do you think of the accountant’s behavior? Include in your discussion the responsibility of the accountant.
For Use in a Financial Accounting Course
1. Earnings management, that is, ‘‘cooking the books,’’ and the motivations management might have for doing this (e.g.,
internal or external pressures) are covered in this course. Although this non-profit organization might not be subject to
the same pressures as a for-profit organization, discuss what behaviors or procedures you find suspicious in the scenario
presented. How would Gino or the other board members rationalize the way they do things? Do you think opportunities
are present to ‘‘cook the books?’’
2. Identify at least ten ‘‘red flags’’ for potential fraud in this case, for example, inadequate records. Why were checks
written to board members?
3. Recommend specific internal control activities that could be put in place to correct the current situation and prevent
similar problems from occurring in the future. For example, make no disbursements without proper documentation and
make all disbursements by check payable to the vendors.
4. Identify and discuss the practical logistical issues of removing Gino and the other board members.
5. What do you think of the accountant’s behavior? Include in your discussion the responsibility of the accountant.
APPENDIX A
Definition of a Homeowners’ Association
HOAs are common in single-family housing developments, condominiums, and townhouse complexes and serve as the
governing body for the purpose of protecting the value and desirability of the real property. Most often, HOAs are formed as
Issues in Accounting Education
Volume 32, Number 1, 2017
Lehmann and Heagy
72
non-profit corporations. When a person buys a property governed by a HOA, the owner automatically enters into a contract
with the association and agrees to obey all the rules adopted by the association. These rules address such issues as what
materials and colors can be used for the house roofs, what colors you can paint your house, what kind of landscaping you can
do, the size and height of structures you build in your back yard, and whether election and contractor signs can be placed in
yards. These rules are expressed in a document called covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R).
The HOA assesses fees on homeowners. These fees are used to cover the costs to maintain common areas used by all the
homeowners. These common areas may be, for example, swimming pools, playgrounds, walking paths, and tennis courts. By
adhering to the rules and paying the association dues, the implication is that amenities will be well maintained.
When a developer completes a subdivision and sells the first few houses, it is customary for the developer to create a
homeowners’ association. Some of the new homeowners volunteer to serve on the board of the association. An election is held
for the association’s president, vice president, secretary, and treasurer. Because these are unpaid positions that require much
time, volunteers can be hard to come by. As a result, often the board members and officers are the same people. In addition to
the board members and officers, an architectural control committee is established to approve or disapprove changes to the
property.
The laws of the state in which the development is located govern HOAs in that state. An application and other
documentation required by the state must be submitted to the Secretary of State. The next step is to create bylaws that set out
the duties of the directors and officers and outline how the HOA will operate. Finally, the directors and officers adopt
covenants, conditions, and restrictions.
Operation of a Homeowners’ Association
States vary as to the strictness of their HOA laws. A frequent requirement is that the association provide times during
normal business hours that records can be inspected by any HOA member. Minimum records that must be maintained and
retained may include:
articles of incorporation, CC&R, bylaws, and all amendments to these documents,
financial books and records,
account records of current owners,
contracts between the association and other parties,
minutes of meetings of the owners and the board, and
tax returns and audit records.
Other common state HOA laws pertain to board meetings, homeowners’ dues, and contracts. Board meetings must be open
to all members except in cases where a closed executive session is needed (e.g., potential litigation, contract negotiations). All
decisions made in a closed executive session must be reported in the minutes of the meeting. All board meetings must be
properly announced by written notice or at least posted where everyone can see the notice. Possible outlets for the notices are
the HOA newsletter or website if those are available.
Issues in Accounting Education
Volume 32, Number 1, 2017
A Case Study of Fraud Concerns at a Homeowners’ Association
73
CASE LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE
Case Overview and Learning Objectives
The purposes of the case are to help students recognize indicators, or warnings, of the potential for fraudulent activity,
known as ‘‘red flags,’’ in a given situation and to identify measures that could be taken to mitigate this potential. This case
requires students to analyze the situation and either independently (or in small groups) respond to the case questions. The
learning objectives are that upon completion of this assignment students will be able to:
1. Recognize the conditions that increase the potential for fraudulent activity.
2. Identify the ‘‘red flags’’ indicating that fraudulent activity could occur.
3. Develop recommendations to mitigate the identified risks and include discussion of logistical issues of board
replacement and professional responsibility of the accountant.
The case requirements address these learning objectives. Table 1 indicates the mapping of the learning objectives to the
case requirements.
By providing a real-life example of a potential fraud situation, students may better understand how important it is to
identify and act on ‘‘red flags’’ that indicate areas that might be subject to fraudulent activities.1
Implementation Guidance
This case can be configured for a variety of accounting courses—for example, fraud examination, auditing, accounting
information systems, and financial accounting. Case requirements are given for each of these four courses at the end of the case.
The case is short enough that it can be assigned as a planned part of a course or introduced later into the course when an extra
credit assignment is needed. The case requirements can be scaled back by eliminating some of those recommended by the
authors.
The case can be completed individually or in small groups. If the case is worked in small groups, then students not only
develop skills in identifying areas for potentially fraudulent activities, but also gain new insights through the feedback provided
by their group members. Group solutions give the instructor an opportunity to integrate brainstorming into the assignment.
Brainstorming sessions are required by SAS No. 99, Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit, to determine
possible fraud risks. SAS No. 109, Understanding the Entity and Its Environment and Assessing the Risks of Material
Misstatement, also requires brainstorming sessions to identify additional causes of potential material misstatements in the
financial statements. According to Landis, Jerris, and Braswell (2008), brainstorming teams tend to generate a greater number
of better ideas than individuals.
The appropriate time to administer the case depends on when sufficient student preparation has occurred in the course.
Typically, the case is introduced in a fraud examination course about halfway through the semester, after covering the Fraud
Triangle, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and the COSO (2013) Framework (hereafter, COSO 2013). In the AIS
1
W. Albrecht, C. C. Albrecht, C. N. Albrecht, and Zimbelman (2016) suggest that it is incumbent upon educators to make certain that students recognize
the behavioral symptoms of fraud and understand the elements of the Fraud Triangle, as they will be the ones to provide ‘‘tips’’ of potential fraudulent
behavior during their careers.
TABLE 1
Mapping of Learning Objectives to the Case Requirementsa
Case Requirement
1. Recognize conditions for potential fraudulent activity
2. Identify ‘‘red flags’’ for fraud in case
3. Identify control weaknesses following COSO framework, recommend control activities
4. Discuss logistical issues of replacing board
5. Discuss accountant’s behavior and accountant’s responsibility to HOA
a
Learning Objective
LO1
LO2
LO3
LO3
LO3
The wording used for the case requirements for each type of course are included in the manuscript.
LO1: Recognize the conditions that increase the potential for fraudulent activity.
LO2: Identify the ‘‘red flags’’ indicating that fraudulent activity could occur.
LO3: Develop recommendations to mitigate the identified risk areas to include discussion of logistical issues of board replacement and professional
responsibility of the accountant.
Issues in Accounting Education
Volume 32, Number 1, 2017
Lehmann and Heagy
74
course, the case is introduced after coverage of risks and controls in accounting systems, which includes discussion of the
COSO 2013 and SAS No. 99 (usually about halfway through the semester). For the auditing and financial accounting courses,
this case is introduced after coverage of the COSO 2013, and any material related to earnings management. In classes where
specific coverage of behavioral red flags for fraud is not included, background material on fraud might be distributed as
supplemental reading. Examples include the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE 2014) discussion of the fraud
triangle on its website (http://www.acfe.com/fraud-triangle.aspx). Singleton (2008, 2010) discusses basic axioms of fraud that
can be applied to IT audits or audits in general. Other resources are as follows:
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE): Report to the Nations on Occupational Fraud and Abuse: 2014 Global
Fraud Study
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO 2013): Internal Control—Integrated
Framework Executive Summary
Deloitte (2014): Fraud Risk Management—Providing Insight into Fraud Prevention, Detection, and Response
Ernst & Young (2014): Overcoming Compliance Fatigue—Reinforcing the Commitment to Ethical Growth: 13th Global
Fraud Survey
KPMG (2014): 2014 Global Audit Committee Survey
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC 2016): Global Economic Crime Survey 2016: US Results. Adjusting the Lens on Economic
Crime.
Evidence of Efficacy
The case presented here was used in a graduate-level fraud examination course, a graduate/undergraduate auditing course,
an undergraduate accounting information systems (AIS) course, and an M.B.A. financial accounting course.2 All the courses
were taught at the authors’ institution. Two different instructors used the cases in their courses and completed the survey.3 The
two instructors assigned the case as an individually worked out-of-class assignment. This common implementation approach
was used for ease of feedback collection and analysis.
We collected feedback information f