It depends on how the board decides, or that's what the process was. Up until the findings, how it worked was that if there was a direct conflict, then a board member would recuse themselves—again, employees were not aware of these conflicts until the end—versus if it was a perceived conflict, then board members would decide for themselves whether it was or wasn't.
The key thing to understand here is this: Even if a conflict of interest exists, what the other findings in RCGT show is that every single project for the last several years has been unanimously approved, with zero dissent. Even if you're leaving the room, and even if you're not reviewing it and have not involved any of your opinions, it doesn't matter. Once it gets to the project review committee and board, every single project ultimately gets approved. Again, it's not just that they're breaking conflict of interest; there's actually proof that they do not review and that they have zero oversight over some of the funding they have provided.