It's very simple. A proposed fund whose description doesn't even mention sustainable development was enough to supposedly convince you that it corresponded to the contribution agreement.
Two projects were identified in the Auditor General's report. In the case of the ALUS project, it was $5 million paid to the best friend of the CEO of SDTC, Leah Lawrence.
In the case of the Saskatchewan Indian Institute of Technologies project, the application was written by the same person who was doing the assessment. Both of these projects were approved right under your nose, with no mention of sustainable development and no compliance with the contribution agreement. You allowed millions of dollars to be approved, and you didn't see fit to talk to your supervisor about it either. Don't you think money is important?