There was an agenda item toward the end of the Board meeting on August 14 to expand the existing $85,000.00 contract with Corporate Integrity Systems to include all District personnel except teachers, library staff and police officers. Board member Janey Humpries asked a series of questions and her full comments are displayed below. There was zero discussion of her questions during the meeting although Board President, Dr. Valdenia Winn, did see fit to respond to the same inquiry when the press asked the questions after the meeting.
From left to right in the picture above, here is your Board and how they voted on this contract expansion: Brenda Jones abstained (which is recorded as a NO vote), Wanda Paige voted YES, Harold Brown voted YES, Maxine Drew abstained (another NO for the record), Dr. Stacy Yeager voted YES, Janey Humphries voted NO, and Dr. Valdenia Winn voted YES. Total count four YES - three NO. The contract will be expanded. Here are the comments made by Board member Humphries:
"Concerns with CIS Contract and addendum: For Agenda Board Discussion
August 14, 2018
Whereas, the KCKPS School Board approved a contract with Corporate Integrity Systems, LLC (“CIS”), to conduct an audit of the compliance and implementation of Board adopted policies as they relate to the recruitment, hiring, and assignment of compensation for administrative positions;
I struggle with understanding the question that we are trying to answer.
Clearly there is a desire to expand the current audit to include non-administrative positions. Why?
From contract addendum:
1. Definition of Administrative Positions. “Administrative positions” shall include all positions considered administrative, including but not limited to Officers, Directors, Executive Directors, Coordinators, Instructional Coaches, Technicians, Bus Drivers, and Administrative/Board support. Administrative positions include all positions referred to as the “Administrative tier.”Administrative tier positions include all personnel positions at KCKPS except teachers, police officers, and library employees. Why are these three exempt?
In general administration includes the superintendent’s council, executive directors, directors, coordinators, managers, principles, and assistant principals.
These positions are charged to manage programs, and evaluate employees.
Administration are positions that manage and evaluate programs and staff. Instructional coaches and bus drivers, nutritional service workers, IT, shop and custodial, paraprofessionals, etc.. These positions do not evaluate or manage programs.
If we’re trying to understand the cost of administration in the district, we should use the definition that is required by the state accounting system.
Efficiency studies have been conducted by the Kansas legislative post audit of the district. Have we reviewed the results? Would it not be practical, and prudent, to review this report to determine whether or not the district is overstaffed with administrative positions?
We received a report at the June 26th, 2018 BOE Mtg under Superintendent’s Communications from Integrity Consulting Solutions, regarding 6 individuals that Dr. Winn identified as victims of discrimination in her April 17th, 2018 email, which found no evidence of discriminatory hiring practices. She did make some suggestions to improve communication between applicant and HR etc.
The previous contract with CIS was signed on June 2, 2018.
How much work has been done under this contract? What are the results?
How much of the $85,000 in taxpayer money has been spent to date on this investigation? (Equals about 400 days of substitute coverage) Have time sheets been submitted documenting work done?
Have some specific problems been identified that require further investigation?
And if not, then what is the point of the contract addendum?
The Board as a whole has not received any reports from this company.
Again I would ask for clarification: what is the question or questions that we are trying to answer?
How is the CIS inquiry expected to improve the District?
This contract doesn't have parameters or objectives.
We require our teachers to post objectives and learning goals using the scales.
We require that because we want to be transparent, to let students and staff and parents know what is expected of students and how we will measure it.
So what is the objective of this contract? What is being looked for? We don't let our teachers say "I'll know it when I see it" we make them explain what is expected and how it will be measured.
Do we not hold ourselves, as the Board of Education to the same standards?
IS THIS AN EFFECTIVE USE OF DISTRICT RESOURCES AND TIME?
So we don't know what we are looking for, we don't know what we will do with what is found, andwe don't even know if this is the lowest responsible price? This was a no bid contract first brought to the Board as a whole during a special Saturday BOE meeting and voted on at the same meeting.
I have been contacted by numerous employees regarding the following:
Whereas, CIS will prepare a written report of its findings to the Board of Directors.
What personnel and confidential information may be contained in the report to the Board? That we as a Board should not have access to?
And this statement: “All District employees and contractors shall cooperate with this Board sanctioned audit.
They perceive this as a threat, that if they give the wrong answer or decline to answer ANYquestion they fear they will lose their jobs. THIS IS A REAL CONCERN OF EMPLOYEES!
“KCKPS shall provide CIS with… access to personnel files – paper and electronic; and access to payroll information.”
“Confidential information includes, but is not limited to: social security numbers, information from an individual’s personnel file (except for the individual’s name, position, salary, contract of employment and length of service), and medical/health insurance records.”
As part of this audit, CIS may obtain or have access to such confidential information whether from interviews, documents or other means. How would you feel it you were one of our employees? Would you want to work in a place that makes copies of your confidential personnel file available to outside entities in this era of hacking and shrinking privacy?
How do we know people's sensitive information will be kept in accordance with the laws? We have no idea who will be allowed access to the information.
Can individual employees appeal for protection from sharing any part of their employment file Medical information? Anything?
If a leak occurs, who will individuals sue? The KCKPS District? Where would the money come from to address such an issue? From taxpayer money intended to provide education for our children!
Are District contractors, like construction companies, vendors going to be asked to provide information internal to their business? Who will do business with us?
The Board of Education is elected to develop a mission and set POLICY and hire a Superintendent. Then to respond to the recommendations of the Superintendent and the expert staff THEY hire. We are policy makers not administrators of our school district."
Janey Marie Humphries
August 14, 2018
This Blog is being generated by a group of citizens invited by USD 500 to participate as a Citizen's Advisory Committee during the Bond Issue campaign. This group continues to be involved in supporting USD 500 and watching the results from the successful Bond election. This Blog is best read from the bottom/oldest post to the to/newest post.