Seattle Schools Audit Committee Meeting Today

Update: Sorry to say but I gave up. The meeting started nearly 10 minutes late despite a full agenda. The main problem is that the microphone was not set up properly (maybe have a mic at each end of the table?). You could hear the directors well but many staff do not speak up. Plus, whoever was closest to the mic kept shuffling papers which made it difficult to discern what was being said. 

I tweeted this twice, hoping someone might clue in the folks at the meeting but nope. What was interesting is the two presenters from Moss Adams who were virtual ALSO had issues hearing what was being said/asked. 

The only updates I can give you are these.

One, apparently it's not clear who is in charge/responsible to make sure the background checks/references/ sign-ins get done. 

Two, Marni Campbell gave the report on security and safety. She said there were "foundational practices" like limiting entryways, going to the office and signing in every single time you are in the building but that it can get undone by people propping open doors. I saw this a lot in my time at Roosevelt and people just didn't want to listen. 

Director Harris, not a committee member but listening in asked about the interior locks on classrooms and the progress on that safety measure. Campbell didn't have numbers and Capital Building's Richard Best said they are three-quarters done. Harris followed up by asking when they will be done and he said "end of calendar year 2024." Boy, slow and steady on that work. 

Hampson said they should include students in safety plans and said something about "I won't be here in March" and laughed. 

end of update

 

The meeting starts at 4 pm and it's under the purview of Directors Hampson, Rankin and Song Maritz.

Here's the agenda which is quite lengthy. I went through it this morning and it certainly was head-shaking.

The document has now been updated because only a couple of hours ago, half the agenda items had no supporting documentation. The only item currently without documentation is the "Safety & Security Review."

(FYI, the district finally put something out about the robberies near schools trend - through it came through Bev Redmond, Chief of Staff, and not the Superintendent.)

But honestly, FFS!

The district hired Moss Adams (which is likely on retainer by now) to:

(Moss Adams) conducted this Prevention and Response to Employee and Contractor-Perpetrated Student Safety Incidents Performance Audit for Seattle Public Schools (the District, SPS). The goal of this performance audit is to assess whether the District has implemented reasonable mechanisms to prevent student safety incidents committed by an employee or contractor, and whether it has an efficient and effective ability to detect and address such incidents. This audit examined the District’s current practices for maintaining student safety in relation to employees and contractors.

For some reason, MA did not include wording on volunteers although those folks are part of this in their report.

It seems that despite it being 2023, despite the fact there are procedures about student safety with contractors and volunteers around hiring and onboarding and even regulatory requirements, SPS is STILL not doing it right. It's things like:

Finding: District policies lack detail on hiring requirements relating to sexual misconduct reporting and background checks.

Recommendation: Update policies and procedures relating to employee hiring to more clearly articulate hiring requirements, including requirements to report prior sexual misconduct and complete a background check before beginning employment at the District. 

 

Finding: The District ensured the completion of criminal background screening and sexual misconduct release forms for most but not all employees who may have contact with students. Within our sample of 52 hired employees, we found the District hired one employee without background check records, three employees more than a month prior to background check clearance, and two without completed sexual misconduct screenings.

Recommendation:
Create and implement a mandatory hiring checklist for each type of employee to ensure all applicants have completed the necessary requirements before they are hired, including completion of background checks and sexual misconduct screenings before an employee starts work. 

There is no such checklist in SPS HR for these sensitive areas? C'mon! And apparently:

Not all hiring managers documented three reference checks and some positions do not require reference checks to be performed, presenting a risk that the District may not consistently identify problematic behaviors that could impact student safety prior to hiring. 

One issue is that community partners are not employees of SPS so it appears a gray area. That's nonsense. I don't care who is working for whom or if you are a volunteer, EVERY SINGLE ADULT WHO INTERACTS WITH STUDENTS NEEDS TO BE CLEARED.

If community partners will not help with this, then maybe they should not be part of SPS.

As well, it appears that different departments do things that "contribute to confusion, inconsistencies, and potential gaps in staff hiring processes. 

Plus, schools are sloppy on oversight of volunteers.

And this is a good one:

Finding: Investigation data is not consistently tracked in iSight, the District case management system, preventing the District from easily analyzing and tracking all cases.

Recommendation: Develop processes to collect case-level data on investigations, including those conducted by building-level investigators, to ensure accurate investigation data is documented. 

 
Seriously? The district doesn't not track investigations in a central databank?

There is also an update to another Moss Adams report from three+ years ago on teaching and learning (now call "academics"). What I gleaned from it is the district has done some real creation of new jobs at JSCEE. I counted 4 or 5 plus a new "office of Accountability and Assistant Superintendent of Accountability." No, I don't know who that is.

The Internal Audit Committee report isn't good news either. (I don't know who's on this committee.)

Timeliness of this review is critical for two reasons: 1) the implementation timeline is slipping into significant delays and needs to be brought on track 2) Internal Audit is due to conduct a Regulatory Requirements Analysis.

The Regulatory Requirements Analysis Audit is limited to focusing on whether we are effectively tracking our compliance requirements. As the recommended engagement includes identifying current activities related to compliance and may identify who (if anyone) is tracking compliance requirements, it will be most valuable if conducted prior to the Regulatory Requirements Analysis Audit; may help identify where compliance tracking is lacking; and areas where testing where may be needed with the Regulatory Requirements Analysis Audit.

I rolled my eyes here:

President Hersey asked that Vice President Rankin, who sits on this committee and is the lead on the Ad Hoc Governance committee to lead on this particular follow-up review. The proposed scope is as follows:

Purpose: To assess roles, responsibilities, and authorities of the School Board, Board Office, Superintendent Office and District departments related to governance, progress monitoring, risk, and compliance tracking under a policy governance model and student outcomes focused framework (activities of which include: progress monitoring, time use management, superintendent evaluation, board evaluation, etc.).

 I thought they already did this. Again, it's 2023 so why isn't this just known by now?

 There is a Special Education Audit and Finance Committee Update. I confess to not being sure what this all means to Special Education within SPS. Anyone?

There's a CAP (Corrective Action Plan) for the Ingraham High School Construction. Here's something that stuck out to me:

Seek clarification from State Agency:
Determine how labor sick pay is to be calculated with Department of Labor & Industries. 

Again, 2023 and SPS Capital Planning doesn't know this?

There is a new group - ERC - Enterprise Risk Council - and they now have a charter. Interestingly, they took out "the requirement that all members must be direct reports to the Superintendent."

But,
"Clarified this body is owned by SPS Leadership and operates as an independent body." Hmmm.

I wish they had included more details but it's a very simple PowerPoint section.