Thursday, June 30, 2011

ASB Audit - Heads Should Roll

There are a couple of folks who, as a result of the state auditor's report on the ASB fund should find themselves suddenly no longer employed by Seattle Public Schools.

First, the fiscal specialist at Garfield High School. Whoa! Some VERY bad findings here including about $56,000 in cash and checks left laying about and $169,000 in unpaid invoices. On top of that, about $12,000 that had just gone missing. That person should not be surprised to lose their job over these offenses.

Second, numerous procedural and internal control failures around an $80,000 contract with the Urban League for mentoring - WHICH CAME AFTER THE RSBDP SCANDAL and all of the promises that everyone would be good. These failures were committed by the Executive Director of Schools in regard to Cleveland High School. There is only one person who was the Executive Director of Schools responsible for Cleveland High School last year. I don't really see how this person can keep that job after these failures in the wake of the Pottergate scandal.

Third, no one had submitted a claim for a reimbursement for the ASB fund at Franklin High School since 2006 because the custodian did not know how. This could be a firing offense as well.

At six of seven high schools, the ASB expenditures exceeded the approved amounts. State law allows for the School Board to be held personally liable for any overspending in any of the funds under their control - including the ASB fund. I don't know if the expenditures exceeded the appropriated amount for the District as a whole, but it is definitely worth investigating.

There's more, but I don't see how these folks are not held accountable - potentially to the extent of dismissal.

44 comments:

mirmac1 said...

According to Noel Treat, Garfield Fiscal Specialist is gone already. Yay!

Jack Whelan said...

I came around 5:45 and left at 9: 15, and they were still going strong. There were some valuable (to me) spread sheets distributed that laid out what the capacity with and without portables is for every elementary and middle school in the district (nothing about high schools) and what the projections for enrollment would be in the near future. The elementary schools were all clustered according to the Middle Schools into which they feed.

The discussion focussed on each Middle school cluster and possible soft (boundary changes) and hard (new construction/portables/bringing closed schools like Marshall back online) solutions for the middle schools, like Eckstein, we know are going to be egregiously overcrowded.

The part I stayed for was basically expositional. I don't know if they actually came to any concrete decisions after I left. It was mostly discussing this option or the other and the costs involved in each middle school cluster.

Jack said...

Correction: I left at 8:15.

Po3 said...

It is clear that there is a "Director of Education" that just rubberstamps anything that comes across his desk.

Hope he did not get a pay raise!

seattle citizen said...

This part leaves me scratching my head, maybe someone can explain the difference bettween a couple of job titles, and also the difference between bank accounts...
After a basketball game in the Garfield gum that raised $6,500, "the money was given to the fiscal specialist for deposit. The school’s basketball coach instructed the fiscal specialist to deposit the money with the Foundation [Garfield Foundation, the benefciary of this charity game].
The Alliance for Education is the fiscal agent of the Garfield High School Foundation. We spoke to the Alliance’s Chief Financial Officer and confirmed it did not receive any money from the school for this event. We also confirmed with the District’s Accounting Department that the money was not deposited into a District bank account."

Sooo...What is the Alliance for Education's role in this transaction? What is the difference between the school's fiscal specialist and the Alliance being the "fiscal agent" for this transaction? Chain of control over the (now missing) money goes as follows, then: Gate; Coach; Fiscal Specialist; Fiscal Agent; District Account.
Why doesn't Fiscal Specialist deposit the money directly into the district's account, for disbursement to the Foundation? Why does the Alliance serve as fiscal middleman on this transaction?

The auditors "confirmed" with the Alliance that they never got the money - who did they talk to first that suggested they didn't? The coach instructed the Fiscal Specialist to deposit the money...deposit it where? With the Alliance? Is there a deposit slip?

There must be some sort of receipt trail for this big wad o' cash...Where does the receipt trail stop? Or did four or five people (named above) not leave one paper receipt? That seems very, very, VERY sloppy.

sharpeas said...

The district is spending money crazily. 440 laptops were purchased for the STEM program at $1089 each. This is mind blowing. You can buy a very good laptop for $400, and probably less if you bought 440 of them. Why are we overpaying to this extent? Same applies to the services of Urban League. If we designed and ran our own after school tutoring and mentoring programs we could serve many more students for less. And we'd know what we were paying for.

someone said...

@seattle - there are apparently procedural differences when the activity is a "fundraiser" for a third party and not the school itself. Hence the need to deposit in a different account, and the 3rd party being the fiscal overseer (as it were) of those funds.

If the event had been for the school itself, then it would have gone directly into the SPS ABS account. I believe that's intended to keep monies seperate when generated for differing reasons. I agree it's a bit fuzzy, but made sense overall.

Where I saw the biggest problem was the "Education director" who approved things before contracts were even signed, and apparently didn't ask a lot of questions that would seem obvious to any rational exec - what did party X do to earn this money pops to mind.

Yes, Charlie, I totally agree - someone higher up the food chain than the fiscal tech needs to answer for these things - there are errors upon errors upon errors in that report that do not appear terribly difficult to mitigate, if one is actually doing one's job - which to me includes KNOWING THE REGS!
aiyiyi - dysfunction thy name is SPS

seattle citizen said...

someone said,
"there are apparently procedural differences when the activity is a "fundraiser" for a third party and not the school itself. Hence the need to deposit in a different account, and the 3rd party being the fiscal overseer (as it were) of those funds."
But the third party benefiting was the Garfield Foundation, not the Alliance for Education. The Garfield Foundation was not the fiscal overseer, the Alliance was.
I'm now recalling that the Alliance might handle this sort of thing for many schools, serving as sort of an organizational go-to for fiscal specialists, school foundations, etc.
If the Alliance was "overseeing" the fundraising trail from game gate (money) to district (?) Foundation acount, it lost track of it somewhere.
Who is responsible for making sure money taken in at the gate gets to the bank?

Should the Alliance be doing this work? They are also enmeshed in funneling Gates money into the district as managers of Strategic Plan money donated by Gates, et al. They should choose: Are they the old Alliance, which served merely to help schools (like in this case, as a manager and fundraiser for specific, localized school activites) or as a conduit of outside monies from Reformers that change district-wide policy, procedure and pedagogy. I'm not comfortable with them doing the latter, and wish they would return to the former.

Paul said...

Charlie

You are too mellow.

Say that it's MGJ's own Michael Tolley that was that person.

He's been cashing checks for mere posing for far too long here.

Maybe Maria or Broad can find him something elsewhere. He's no Cordell Carter, thats for sure.

But thats not a compliment either.

wishin' SPS would move into the 21st century said...

fiscal responsibility of ASB funds has been poor in SPS for years. They need to look at other school districts' financial system for ASB, namely the "H.D. Baker" system, which would allow them to pull receipts daily for EVERY school. It's the downtown office's responsibility to make sure schools manage those funds properly. With barcoding on students' IDs they'd be able to pull up transactions for any student anytime! They could also use the system to manage department budgets. Sheesh, why are people still writing receipts?

SPS move into the 21st century! said...

$1028/laptop AND THEY'RE NOT even MACs which come loaded with software! Sheesh.

Patrick said...

Jack Whelan, are those spreadsheets online?

Anonymous said...

From reading the Audit Report it appears that standard procedure for the District is to disregard laws and procedures, misappropriate funds year after year, get caught by the state, apologize and get away with it... and do it again and again. Is anyone involved ever investigated for possible criminal fraud?

-WHERE'S the "accountability"?

Seattle Voter said...

WHERE'S the "accountability"?

That would lie with the Board. The majority of whom are conveniently up for relection this fall. If we are truly lucky, none will survive the primary in August. As the saying goes - vote early and often.

Dave said...

A couple years ago, our union found that a gym teacher at West Seattle was renting out the gym on weekends and pocketing funds. They were Brazillion Ju-Jitsu matches advertised on the net and everything.

Kennedy did nothing but mouth words about how seriously they took such matters. Nothing was done and the guy later quit.

After the Auditor confirmed that our facts were correct, we had to pass a bill in the legislature saying that in future cases the employee would be fired.

Yes, this has been going on for years.

The Board took no notice then either.

Culture of fear? Hardly.

More like a culture of entitlement.

Really in the know said...

Seattle citizen and Dave,
Believe you me, West Seattle and Garfield boys basketball are not the only ones! Let's add Franklin boys basketball program to the list. The use the gym at district cost for fundraisers for their "foundation, alliance, etc.". The adults then intentionally circumvent ASB policies and Title IX laws. It's been going on for years.

While there's nothing wrong with school programs fundraising, if students are involved in generating revenue the funds are supposed to go to ASB whether on campus or not. If no students are involved a group, alliance, organization, could use district facilities for fundraising as long as they go through proper rental policies, also paying for custodial and security if necessary.

someone said...

You know - the more I read about this stuff, the more I can't help wondering - are the continual poor audit performances a result of widespread incompetence? poor hiring decisions? bad training? or people taking advantage of those to feather their own nests....

It's just so unfathomable how many times the District gets away with "oops we're sorry we didn't know..." and yet - rarely is anyone of authority fired.

I look at all the stuff involved and I think - a thousand here, 5 thousand there - maybe it's chump change in the larger budget scenario - but it adds up over time - like to a school counselor salary. It's appalling. LIterally appalling.

Terrence J. Menage, Ed.D. said...

Most of the sound principal preparation programs emphasize the need to closely supervise ASB funds in your school; regardless of the person designated as the ASB fiscal specialist/tech, it is the responsibility of the principal and the courses/programs for aspiring principals stress that these funds are the most likely fiscal problem area one may encounter.

Certainly appears as though the principal of each school would be the first stop for holding individuals accountable; move up the chain of command for whomever is responsible for supervising these principals. To me this is but one more example of how lack of accountability is flowing down the org chart in the district; board fails to supervise the superintendent, the superintendent fails to supervise district directors and managers, who then fail to supervise principals and down the line it goes.

I know for a fact that some individuals in positions of responsibility are performing their supervisory duties in the district, but it certainly is not being done consistently and effectively. What additional evidence do we need that the gross mismanagement of our public schools is directly harming students?

There continues to be revelations on a monthly basis that supports the call for a forensic audit of district headquarters operations, administrative and fiscal. A patient with cancer would not expect doctors to merely address one or two cancerous growths without attacking the source of the cancer.

Terrence

Really in the know said...

Terrence,
I respectfully disagree with you about the principal being the first person up the chain. It is the accounting offices responsibility to train and monitor, also through auditing, fiscal accountability. Like I stated earlier, if the district would get electronic accountability, like the eastside schools do, for all dollars coming into a school, with the fiscal clerk being held accountable for district and ASB policies, there would hopefully be less loss.

As painful as it is to say, I am guessing that eastside school districts know they better not mess with rich people's money or the money their kids generate. And because many of those affluent parents watch closely AND hold the higher ups (superintendent and school boards) accountable!

SPS is behind the times, way behind the times with all things fiscal and that involve record keeping. It's been going on alot especially since olchesfke! Remember that 50 mil no ones ever found under his watch?

Dave said...

Btw. You can add Hale to the list as well where private basketball leagues were operating for years and no one knew where the gate receipts ended up.

After a 3-4 year struggle to bring an end to such facility uses (as the District General Fund has to pay for cleaning up, etc.) our union settled on a new "Superintendent procedure" or "Board policy" which was presented to the Operations Committe several years ago. Fred Stephens was then to arrange for full Board approval.

Guess I don't need to mention its still not yet adopted.

Last we brought it up, Bill Martin was going to get it done this summer. (Ahem)

Now, we have asked the Interim Chief Operating Officer to make certain it happens and we hope for the best.

So it goes................

Anonymous said...

"While there's nothing wrong with school programs fundraising, if students are involved in generating revenue the funds are supposed to go to ASB whether on campus or not. If no students are involved a group, alliance, organization, could use district facilities for fundraising as long as they go through proper rental policies, also paying for custodial and security if necessary."

Hmm.

What about afterschool clubs? What if they meet off school grounds? What if they include students from several schools, some private? Is it only a matter of using the school name or location?

What about PTSA fundsraisers. So if my child helps bake the cookies that are sold at the bake sale, the $ can't go to PTSA because a student was involved? Or what if students helped set up/clean up the bake sale? My child is a PTSA member. Does that change things or is she still only allowed to fundraise for ASB?

How does this affect ticket sales at the school concert or play? ASB funds only? If students play a jazz combo at the school auction does it then become an ASB fundraiser? What if the only kids involved are from a different schoool? What about all those kid art projects sold at PTSA auctions.

How do elementary ASBs supervise all the fundraising?



-Fundraising just seems like too much trouble.

Anonymous said...

Th executive director, called out in the audit:
1)did not do their job and
2)was not honest when questioned by the auditor.

I know this executive director has been reassigned to yet another set of schools. Third placement since coming to SPS with Dr. Goodloe Johnson.

I am hoping for some accountability; not resassignment.


HS Parent

Terrence J. Menage, Ed.D. said...

Really in the know,

I agree that improved and updated processes and systems (similar to those used in many other districts) would go a long way toward addressing these problems; also agree that SPS is behind the times and trends in so many ways.

I stand by my statement that building principals need to be held accountable in this type of financial failing. One of my first roles as an administrator was in a school that had terrible oversight, procedure and process for ASB funds. As my principal preparation program specifically addressed this area in finance coursework and elsewhere, I knew this to be an issue of great concern. The principal also knew the importance of the matter and assigned me to address the problems and clean it up, which I did. Speaking with various principals over the years, each and every one has agreed that ASB funds are a high priority.

You are also correct in stating that problems in how the district handles money go back at least as far as the Olchefske days. This is one of the reasons I continue to call for a forensic audit of district operations, administrative and fiscal. We may bring in new faces and executive level administration, but we have failed to root out the sources of the problems plaguing our district.

Terrence

Really in the know said...

Dear anonymous,

Sorry about not being more specific. When students are on school grounds fundraising the money is supposed to go to ASB or if they are representing a sport or club using the school's name.

PTSA and boosters may use students to fundraise under their organization's name, but ideally they're not supposed to do it during the school day on school grounds.

WASBO which governs ASB law in the State of Washington holds classes for bookkeepers and school district personnel, however I believe you can find info in their website.

Dave,
West Seattle, Garfield and Franklin boys basketball teams, Hale...hopefully more people will come forward with schools. Again another sad point is that while boys teams make over the top revenue fundraising, they're in violation of Title IX if more money is spent on them vs. Girls outside of trips to playoffs or over breaks.

Terrence,
I hear your rationale so we can agree to disagree :)

Ultimately SOMEONE (perhaps at the city level) willstart to hold SPS management/board accountable? City auditor? If things keep going the way they're going will the running of the district ultimately be taken over by the city anyways?...

Dave said...

Really:

I was not talking about "teams" of students.

My examples were of employees running "off the books" leagues an and events and pocketing the money.

Building Custodians (as opposed to "custodains" of funds) know and report such examples especially when they leave big messes in the building to be handled Monday mornings before school (a VERY busy time for them).

One of the biggest offenders gets by with it (right up to and including this spring) for years and then gets "Principal of the Year" and a big $$ award.

So it goes.........

Stu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Stu said...

The district is spending money crazily. 440 laptops were purchased for the STEM program at $1089 each. This is mind blowing

I just went and checked, for the fun of it; Lakeside School requires students, beginning in 7th grade, to have a laptop for school. Their "basic" model is the Lenovo X120e which they sell to the students for $720.51. This price includes tax and 2 year warranty and damage insurance. (It also includes some repair work and tech support.)

TigerDirect.com sells that model for $419.99, although it only has 2GB Ram instead of 4GB, and offers a "second year" warranty for $98 . . so, that's $520, for a model that's good enough for Lakeside. (That's not saying Lakeside is the "be all to end all" but, regardless how you might feel about Lakeside or private schools, I think we can agree that Lakeside has SOME merit as a program. And, since their history includes people like Bill Gates, Paul Allen, and many of the current Microsoft families, this low-end model probably does the job just fine.)

WAIT . . just found it on amazon.com for $368.93. And the 3-year Square Trade Warranty is only $59.99. That's $428.92 with four years of warranty! That's a difference of around $660 per computer.

HEY, I JUST SAVED THE DISTRICT $290,400!!!

And that's retail!

Heads Should Roll!

stu

Melissa Westbrook said...

Thanks Stu, I'm going to pass this info onto the Board. It's weird none of them asked this question about how much we spent on the laptops themselves.

Stu said...

It's weird none of them asked this question about how much we spent on the laptops themselves.

It's just so indicative of how the district does things. I mean, they didn't really explore the whole STEM thing when they climbed on board, did they? A home-grown program, which this district is actually pretty good at when the administration backs off and lets a program develop, wouldn't have cost half the amount as purchasing the one they purchased. And, like you said, I never head anything about which model of laptop to purchase, though I assume SOMEONE studied it.

Wanna bet the district could get a deal on laptops by buying 500 direct from a manufacturer? Wanna bet Microsoft would give them a licensing discount on software? How 'bout Apple's education program; bet they could get MacBooks for $400 less than they're paying now.

I posted my laptop thing last night, partially as humorous relief at the end of a work night. But it IS interesting how no one on the board ever asked, at least publicly, about the costs per laptop. But, if you look at this board in general, no director has really shown any interest in the details behind a staff decision. For me? If I was approached with a program to buy laptops for students, my FIRST question would be "how much per laptop" followed by "can't we get something less expensive." And if a staff person EVER came to me and said that a student laptop was going to cost over $1000 per unit, we would have to recess the meeting so I could take the necessary time to stop crying with laughter.

This board never asked 'cause this board never cared about the minutia.

stu

Anonymous said...

The school tech binging has been going on for a long time. The fasicnations with MACs is pretty darn incredible considering their costs. I know, I know, Bill Gates is evil incarnate. But really, my kids' elementary just HAD to have the portable MAC computer lab (which they never used after they got them) and the computers were all something like $1500. There was no convincing the principal or anyone else that whatever "tech needs" the school had, those needs could be met at a fraction the cost. There only real plans were some video camera work, which never really happened. Apple has been ripping schools off for years. And everyone just bought into it despite the costs. That was the single biggest cost of discrectionary funding at the school. It's rather like the MLK school sale.

=parent

Terrence J. Menage, Ed.D. said...

The 'lost' laptops at Cleveland are merely the tip of the iceberg regarding technology waste in the district. It has been one of the biggest unreported problems that our public schools maintains almost nonexistent controls over computers and technology equipment.

Thousands upon thousands of dollars worth of equipment is 'lost' each year with no real effort to recover the equipment or prevent the continuation of the losses. This may be the result of what appears to be part of the culture established in headquarters, as it is taxpayer money, little care and concern is demonstrated for abuse, fraud, theft and waste.

Good people are performing their duties and responsibilities throughout the district, but far too many are failing to do so and it is costly to taxpayers as well as harmful to the students.

Stu said...

Apple has been ripping schools off for years.

I guess I'm a little uncomfortable with that line since, a) Apple's not forcing schools to buy their products and, b) there's no excuse for spending that kind of money on ANY computer for a public school and, c) I'm a mac person but accept responsibility for my choices and, d) Apple does have programs where it donates computers and ipads to schools around the world.

When I wrote my Lenova example last night, I was just fishing around before going to sleep. I'm sure that any of us could find a perfectly fine student laptop for $300, that would be just great at Cleveland. It's not that technology is overpriced, it's that the district pays for overpriced technology. Yes, a high-end laptop might do more stuff but they need to look at exactly what the student needs and give him the least expensive thing that meets the requirements!

Although I have no idea of what went on behind the scenes, I'm pretty sure that a school that spends over a thousand dollars on each student laptop spent NO time researching any alternatives AND sure as hell never approached any computer company about donating machines.

Did they even approach Microsoft for discount licenses for software?>

stu

I'm a MAC said...

Ultimately if there is no one to show students how o use and staff how to integrate technology effectively, if doesn't matter if it's a Mac or a PC. SPS does not expect all teaching staff to use technology daily and the professional development for staff is terribly lacking considering the district pays individuals to train staff.

Mac vs. PC (I'm a.Mac)

Patrick said...

$1000 is a lot to pay for a laptop these days. For that it should come with loss or damage insurance, which should save the District from having to care about the missing ones.

In fairness, Stu, the comparison should be with laptop prices last year. Prices have almost certainly dropped for this year. Still, I think that's way more than market if the District didn't get insurance with it.

Charlie Mas said...

The District bought their laptops from Dell.

Charlie Mas said...

Let me be perfectly clear: Michael Tolley should be fired for his poor oversight of the contract with the Urban League. He should also be fired for his failure to comply with District contracting procedures. Remember, this contract came AFTER the bad audit and the District's promises to correct the failures of that bad audit yet it repeats - exactly - the failures that were called out in that audit and - worse still - repeats those identical failures with the very same contractor.

It's unforgiveable.

Stu said...

The District bought their laptops from Dell.

When they bought the laptops, did they ask Dell to mark them up so that they could avoid any deals that might be had?

I know things change year to year but, after taking a glance at the Dell website, I think it would be difficult to spend over a thousand dollars on a laptop for student use, let alone have that as the average cost for 440 laptops. Put aside the fact that Dell has a whole educational K-12 section on the site, where you can customize what you need and then ask for a bid, just on their retail area there are 6 models under $500.

Again, it's actually HARD to spend that kind of money on a student laptop at Dell.

stu

Stu said...

Laptops . . continued!

Something kind of funny just happened. I was about to head off to bed but thought I'd browse a bit for the fun of it. I hit the "next blog" button at the top of the Save Seattle Schools Blog home page and it took me to the "Save Beverly Schools" blog (Massachusetts) which had a whole article about their laptop program. They decided to go the Apple MacBook route, which they buy from Apple for $840 each and then lease to the students for $336 per year. That amount includes insurance for theft and accidental damage, Apple updates and applications, warranty repairs done at the high school by certified technicians, and a loaner laptop while repairs are being done. In addition, those who lease for 4 years, can then buy the laptop for $1.00 at the end.

Salem News

All right, I'm going to bed.

stu

Paul said...

(I knew the "real" Charlie would show up)

Tolley should be fired for the boorish sense of entitlement he exhibited along with the entire MGJ "team", since they got here.

They believe they don't have to cxare about actual taxpayers because they never had to before.

THAT'S THE "KOOL-AID" that some have drunk who, although they have been here awhile, don't have the strength of character to resist the peer pressure.

And they wonder where they went wrong.

Terrence J. Menage, Ed.D. said...

Paul/In The Know/and others:

The depraved indifference being demonstrated by headquarters administrators and building principals regarding taxpayer money and resources (and now student's money) existed before Goodloe-Johnson arrived and will continue after the incumbent board members are long gone if significant action is not taken. A terrible lack of accountability permeates the district and must be addressed.

As far as I am aware, building principal evaluations continue to include ASB fund oversight as one of the elements for their evaluation.

The audits from Olchefske's era and since as well as the Moss Adams report have documented the dysfunctional culture that exists and the nonexistent financial controls and oversight. This recent audit merely reveals that business has usual continues in our public schools; the abuse, fraud, theft and waste of taxpayer money and resources has not been addressed.

A forensic audit is overdue and only supported by one current member of the board; we must remove all incumbents and replace them with people that will commit to taking the necessary action to truly clean up district headquarters. For board members to claim that such an audit is cost prohibitive, we need to clearly tell them to stop pissing on our backs and telling us it is raining. They have no problem finding the money to fund whatever initiative or half-baked program/curriculum that they buy into.

If the Alliance, Gates Foundation, Broad Foundation or other philanthropic entity that claim to care so about our students will not support and help fund such a significant first step, it would appear that these groups must have something they wish to remain hidden. We must insist that the light of day be brought to headquarters operations and that action be taken to root out the issues that continue to subject us to all of these scandals and scandalous behaviors in our public schools.

Dave Doc said...

Just to add to Dave's comments on WSHS JuJitSu tournaments there were actually 3 such tournaments and many AAU basketball tournaments that the principal believed was OK to use the facility for such private profit. I worked the events and was overwhelmed by the over capacity crowds especially at the JuJitSu events. Just watching guys getting their arms broke if they didn't tap out made me furious that such a violent event could take place in a public school setting!! The District needs to educate principals on what can legally take place in it's buildings or this junk will never cease. The principal at the time was a great guy - but in way over his head in my opinion.

Paul said...

Terrence J. Menage and Dave Doc

You both have your fingers on the true pulse of the District and I (and I believe Dave whether he knows it or not) stand corrected.

The practice of using public buildings for private profit (including the Alliance) should be job one for the city ethics folks.

Terrence J. Menage, Ed.D. said...

Paul and Dave Doc,

Anyone that holds a Washington State Certificate to serve as a principal in our state should have received ample coursework and training regarding legal use of public school buildings. The inappropriate 'rental' of district property is something that I assure you was well covered in my principal preparation program, as was ASB fund oversight. I believe that the problem originates in district headquarters, primarily directors failing to adequately supervise the principals. Also, I do not believe that the city ethics office would be the answer...the superintendent doing her/his job, district directors doing their jobs, principals doing their jobs....all the way down the line; which is something new for Seattle Public Schools but would do wonders to address many of the dumb things being done by the district.

As I had utilized this blog to announce my candidacy for the District II position on the Board of Directors, it is appropriate that I also announce the suspension of my campaign on this blog. I fully intend to do what I am able in the future to advocate for learners and learning as well as teachers and teaching. I encourage all to continue the good work being done to improve our public schools and debate/discuss key issues on this valuable blog.

Best wishes,

Terrence

Anonymous said...

I seem to remember that the fiscal specialist at Garfield was fired mid-year for basically not doing anything.

- not sure totally certain, but pretty sure