The CEO could indeed be misinformed and/or misspeaking for escrows. What he said is still relevant and perhaps the escrows won't agree with him, although he seems to be an important person in this matter and directly speaking on the behalf of some team, whether it is including the escrows or not.
He does not speak for the escrows; he speaks for himself and the people working with/for him.
I'm not very concerned with the partial refund, rather how much money was used and taken away from the refund and why.
Then we are of no use to you in that regard. How exactly the released money was spent is way beyond escrow capabilities and I doubt they would provide 'sufficient' proof for it anyway (where sufficient is debatable depending on the reviewer; most of the things that a person can provide I don't deem sufficient as e.g. no cryptography is involved).