Spotlight on District 109

When you use the word “consultant” it can solicit a wide range of reactions.  Some people love consultants, who are generally highly educated people with years of expertise in their field.  They are truly effective in helping organizations make decisions.  Some people view consultants as those who create hundreds of pages of PowerPoint charts, take their hefty fee and bid a fond farewell, leaving the organization just as confused as when they were first hired.  Whatever you may think, there is one thing that is undeniable.  The best consultant’s plan is only effective as the organization who executes it.

District 109 has used many consultants over the years.  The attached document provides detail on what has been paid to various consultants over the past few years.  A quick total shows roughly $340,000 spent on consultants since 2008.  That doesn’t include architectural consultant Fanning Howey whose fee is basically 7% of the work it oversees.  That’s a $70,000 fee per million dollars of capital expenditure.  I’m sure all these fees are “industry norms.”  That’s not what concerns me.

What concerns me is how the district is using these consultants.  $80,000 for a middle school math curriculum.  $29,000 for 21st Century Skills, which the district has recently announced it is scrapping and “folding in” to the other subjects.  $8,500 for an “executive functioning” curriculum.  I seem to remember much discussion at Board meetings by parents who say there is no such thing.

The district also paid $25,000 to the Consortium for Educational Change for a strategic plan.  Now, having served on that team I will say that I was very impressed with that group.  There was much excellent discussion and mountains of data were generated.  Some of the findings are on the district website and are dated December, 2010, about 16 months ago.  Here are a few excerpts.  Please remember this is the DISTRICT generating this document:

”Parents of special education students and district teachers are unhappy with changes in special education programming this year and feel they are not meeting student needs and requirements.”

“Special Education services are in need of attention.”

“The district recognizes it does not have a process in place to monitor the relationships between and among the board, administration, the unions, parent organizations, all schools, and other benchmark districts. There is an unhealthy relationship between union and administration. There are grievances each year. Communication systems are one way and lack a feedback loop between the district office and the schools and between the district office and the community. Staff reports reluctance in giving their opinions as they feel the district does not want to hear opinions that differ from those of district administrators.”

“Transitioning from a system of six schools to a school system that requires consistent implementation of important processes has raised issues of autonomy, trust, engagement, and respect. Morale is low. Teachers and parents feel that decision-making is top down. There is not a systematic process in place to allow collaboration among schools and the district office to define what all schools need to do well together. Building staff does not feel listened to in regard to district decisions.”

Sound familiar?  If so, it’s probably because these are the exact issues that were raised in the contract negotiations, 16 months later.  Apparently, the district has not been listening to its consultants.  The relationship between administration and teachers is as contentious today as it was 16 months ago.  Special education parents are still fighting to change the process 16 months later.

So you’ll excuse me if I don’t get too excited about the HR consultant who is running the search for a new Caruso principal.  They are holding “input sessions” for parents and teachers to “develop the screening criteria that will allow us to find the candidate that has the knowledge, skills and abilities to succeed at Caruso.”  Let’s hope the district actually listens to their consultant this time.  At $9,500 per search, we can’t afford to get this one wrong.