No Contract - $23 Million - IQinVision

On January 30, 2009, I testified in Annapolis about the urgent need for transparency in MCPS procurements via an online searchable website. I gave 4 examples of major procurements that did not appear in MCPS Board of Education minutes. One of the examples I gave was the IQinVision procurement that has received much publicity from the company, but a vote on this procurement is not shown in Board of Education minutes.

Now we know why the IQinVision procurement does not appear in MCPS Board of Education minutes. Once again, there was no contract. Once again, there was no Board of Education approval of this procurement, even though it was clearly over the $25,000 threshold requiring Board action.

According to the limited information that is available on this procurement, the "installation" of 5 IQinVision cameras for Walter Johnson High School cost $9,225.00.

The Press Release from IQinVision announces that 3,000 cameras will be installed in MCPS this year and a total of 12,000 to 13,000 by the end of the initiative. It would appear that 3,000 cameras would equate to a procurement of around $5.5 million for one year. The total "initiative" for 13,000 cameras would appear to be a procurement of around $23,985,000. As stated, the public information on this procurement is very limited.

If Board of Education President Brandman, former Board President Navarro (President when these orders were placed) or Superintendent Weast would like to provide documentation to make this procurement transparent to the public we will post those documents here on the Parents' Coalition blog. At present the only documents available are 3 Purchase Orders and a reference to a GSA Contract with a company that deals in Information Technology Equipment, Software and Services. See those documents below:
IQNC

Publish at Scribd or explore others:

Four words not heard at Board table

The following is testimony delivered in Annapolis on proposed legislation MC 930-09. What documents do exist on these procurements seem to indicate that all four of these contracts were entered into by MCPS during the last two years, during the time that the MCPS Board of Education President was Nancy Navarro.

Montgomery County Delegation

January 30, 2009

Re: MD 930-09 Montgomery County Public Schools - Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2009

Good morning Chairs Madaleno and Feldman and the members of the Montgomery Delegation.

I am Janis Zink Sartucci. I grew up in Montgomery County and I am raising my children in Montgomery County. I attended Montgomery Knolls Elementary School, Eastern Junior High and graduated from Montgomery Blair High School. I am here as a member of Parents Coalition to support Louis Wilen and the Parents Coalition's request that you pass MD 930-09.

In my time before you today, I have four words for you. The four words are:

IQinVision

Promethean

EasyLobby

SmartBoard

These are four words that you will not find in Board of Education minutes approving procurements of the products from these companies. In total, I would estimate that these four words represent contracts of over $30 million in procurements. That’s over $30 million in procurements that are not reflected in MCPS Board of Education minutes. Each of these procurements represents a commitment of taxpayer dollars of well beyond $10,000.

Briefly, let me start with IQinVision. How did Montgomery County citizens discover that MCPS has contracted with this company? In a press release from IQinVision. The contract with this company is not mentioned in Board of Education minutes. Neither is their product IQEye or the consultant that obtained this contract. Rumor has this procurement cost at $9 million. Attachment A

Promethean: How did citizens discover this contract? A press release from MCPS announcing the placement of these products in classrooms. Repeated Maryland Public Information Act requests disclosed that 3,300 Promethean Boards had been purchased for MCPS classrooms, in total a commitment of over $20 million in taxpayer funds without Board of Education review. In support of this purchase, the Superintendent has produced two different versions of a June 9, 2008 memorandum to the Board of Education, purportedly to justify this purchase. Both versions of the June 9, 2008 memorandum are attached. Attachment B

EasyLobby: Citizens discovered this procurement through an article in the Gazette newspaper. This procurement is also not mentioned in Board of Education minutes. Unknown contract cost. Attachment C

SmartBoard: SmartBoards are present in schools and in MCPS headquarters. We simply see them in use but again, can not find any mention of a contract to purchase these items in Board of Education minutes. Unknown contract cost. Attachment D

Does Montgomery County need the Montgomery County Public Schools - Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2009?

Absolutely.

We don’t know what we don’t know.

With regard to funding of this Act, I will reference the recently released State Legislative Audit of Montgomery County Public Schools. In order to fund a searchable website of MCPS procurements, MCPS can cut up the 1,400 credit cards whose use is not being monitored.

From the State Audit:

"Our tests of 32 calendar year 2007 travel expenditures
charged to credit cards totaling $19,028 disclosed 30 expenditures
totaling $17,930 that were not recorded on monthly activity logs and,
therefore, were never approved."

Thank you for this opportunity to speak.

(Attachments available upon request. For each word I searched in the Board of Education minutes on their website and copied the results page. For all of the words except "Promethean" the search yielded "no results". For the Promethean search the only results were references to demonstrations, updates or curriculum but no reference to purchasing 3,300 units.)

UPDATE: EasyLobby procurement was made without a contract and without Board of Education approval.

UPDATE: IQinVision procurement was made without a contract and without Board of Education approval.


UPDATE December 2010: The legislation to create a MCPS database of vendors receiving payments over a specific amount was enacted and the database has now been posted on the MCPS website.

IQinVision removes MCPS logo from advertisement

On February 14, 2009, the Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County, Maryland blog reported that one of Montgomery County Public Schools' technology partners, IQinVision was using MCPS employee testimonials and the MCPS logo in its Internet advertisements.

On February 16, 2009, IQinVision's online advertisement was modified and the MCPS logo was removed. See the original advertisement here and the revised advertisement without the MCPS logo below. However, the advertisement still contains a testimonial from a MCPS employee despite MCPS Policy BBB and the statement (Q&A #9) of Superintendent Weast that such testimonials are not permitted.

mcpscasestudywologo

Publish at Scribd or explore others:

Vegas Trip Vetoed?

As this blog reported on Friday, March 13, 2009, MCPS Director of School Safety and Security, Mr. Bob Hellmuth, was scheduled to give a presentation in Fabulous Las Vegas, Nevada, on Wednesday, April 1, 2009, entitled: "Montgomery County Public Schools: Utilizing Design Standards to Ensure The Right System." Mr. Hellmuth was scheduled to be a panelist along with John Murdock, Jr. (Vice President, Security Division, Netcom Technologies Inc) and Paul Bodell, Vice President Sales and Marketing, IQinVision.

Apparently there has been a change in plans. If you CLICK HERE to go to the revised conference website, the conference website now no longer shows Mr. Hellmuth listed as a panelist, and instead shows Mr. James Gompers, the security consultant to MCPS who selected the IQinVision system. (note: click HERE for an article on how MCPS selected, and financed, the purchase of the IQinVision system).

Jerry Weast spins and the Board of Education sleeps

On January 7, 2009, Superintendent Jerry Weast told the MCPS Board of Education:

"All of our technology partners know they are not permitted to use MCPS testimonials in advertising." Superintendent Jerry Weast, January 7, 2009 answer to Question #9.

That quote sounds great, but doesn't reflect reality.

Below is an example of a MCPS technology "partner" using not only MCPS testimonials, but also the MCPS logo. The September 9, 2008, two page document below is not a MCPS document, but a testimonial put out by the company IQinVision. Don't be fooled by the prominent MCPS logo!

Board of Education minutes do not reflect this procurement and so it is unknown how much this technology "partnership" cost Montgomery County taxpayers, but rumors have this procurement in the $9 million range. An April 2008 press release from the company puts this procurement as occurring when the Board of Education President was Nancy Navarro.

UPDATE 2/17/09 IQinVision Removes MCPS Logo from Advertisement.
Mcps Case Study

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Articles Periodicals & Report study case

Tight budget? Travel to Texas! Tout Products!

Did you know that MCPS had entered into a 6 year initiative to purchase 13,000 security cameras? See the press release below. Please note this is not a MCPS Press Release. Check the Board of Education minutes and look for this procurement! Please post a comment if you can find it! What happened to the tight budget? Teaching positions cut, but MCPS staff continue to travel? What happened to the freeze on travel? What do students get out of a marketing trip to Texas to endorse a product? What about Superintendent Weast's statement to the Board of Education: "All of our technology partners know they are not permitted to use MCPS testimonials in advertising." Superintendent Jerry Weast, January 7, 2009 answer to Question #9. NEWSWIRE

MCPS implements six-year initiative to upgrade to IP-based system

By Leischen Stelter - 03.03.2009

DALLAS--At TechSec Solutions here on Feb. 25, Bob Hellmuth, director, department of school safety and security for Montgomery County Public Schools, discussed his experience overhauling the video surveillance and visitor management systems at the 16th largest school district in the country. Hellmuth, who is charged with protecting 138,000 students, 21,000 employees and 200 schools, said that while the district hasn't had a large-scale incident, there have been several smaller incidents that have propelled the district to upgrade its technology. After a gun went off in a student bathroom, Hellmuth said it took security a significant amount of time to review the tape. "When we were looking down a hall full of students, we saw figures on the video but we couldn't identify them. It was worthless for us," he said. Fortunately, officers were able to identify the offending student by the backpack he was carrying. Currently, Montgomery County is in the second year of its six-year strategic initiative to upgrade its surveillance system from analog to digital. He expects to have more than 3,000 digital cameras installed in the school district by the end of the year and a total of 12,000 to 13,000 cameras by the end of the initiative. But, such an upgrade hasn't been easy. "We've learned lessons over the years and thrown money away because we didn't know what we were doing," he said. The district enlisted the help of a security consultant to design the initiative. "We needed to find somebody who could give us advice and who knew how to do this on a large scale." Paul Bodell, chief marking officer, iQinVision, whose cameras were used in the installation, said it was critical for organizations to clearly understand what quality of video they need in certain locations within their facilties. For example, when school authorities at MCPS were trying to identify a student in a crowded hallway, Bodell said the school could use what he called "general surveillance" to monitor the movement of students, but then install "forensic-quality" video at the end of hallways which could easily identify faces of students. Mix and matching different video needs can not only improve surveillance quality, but also reduce the cost of the overall installation. An important factor for making this transition was involving the district's IT department. "Originally they were standoffish - people don't like change - but once we had a meeting and explained what we wanted to do, IT was onboard. It was important that we brought them in right away," he said. And while the transition to a digital system has largely improved the department's efficiency and investigatative capabilities, it has also reduced costs, Hellmuth said. "More cameras mean less security people. We don't need as many security people and we can employ the people we do have better," he said. "We monitor cameras and look for patterns and if all of a sudden we see a group of people going toward an area, we know there's a problem and we can put someone there quickly." In addition to improving video surveillance, Hellmuth said it was imperative the district improve its visitor management system as well. "People took it as a joke because nobody was checking," he said. The district replaced its paper log system with an ID scan card system, which not only tracks student and visitor movement, it also captures volunteer work hours making it easier to recognize people who contribute to the school, Hellmuth said. The school will also use the system to track maintenance staff's work to ensure they are staying within their budget. To learn more about how Montgomery County Public Schools is improving its technology, register for our Webcast on March 19 at www.securitysystemsnews.com/webcast. Look for more on this story in the April edition of Security Director News. (Red highlighting added.)

What Happens in Vegas.........

Don't miss the Montgomery County Public Schools presentation at the Sands Expo and Convention Center, Las Vegas, Nevada!

Montgomery County Public Schools: Utilizing Design Standards to Ensure the Right System
1:00PM - 2:00PM (Wednesday, April 01, 2009)

Click HERE to read a conference brochure description of this one-hour presentation!

Panelists:

• John Murdock, Jr. - Vice President (Security Division), Netcom Technologies, Inc.
  
• Robert Hellmuth - Director, Department of School Safety and Security, Montgomery County Public Schools
  
• Paul Bodell - Vice President Sales and Marketing, IQinVision
  

(I hate to even bring this up....but isn't there a MCPS travel freeze? So who is paying for the trip to Vegas?)

Missing Royalties

As reported here, in January, Superintendent Jerry Weast told the MCPS Board of Education:

"All of our technology partners know they are not permitted to use MCPS testimonials in advertising." Superintendent Jerry Weast, January 7, 2009 answer to Question #9.

In response to the report on this blog, the MCPS logo was removed from the IQinVision advertisement. The testimonial remained, but the logo disappeared.

But this isn't the first time that the MCPS logo has been used in the advertising of a technology partner. Below is the Wireless Generation press release from 2005. Note the prominent MCPS logo. And note this sentence:

In addition, MCPS also will receive royalties on all sales of the software to other school districts nationwide.

Royalties? How much has MCPS received in royalties since 2005?

Multiple inquiries by national education activist Peyton Wolcott to Superintendent Weast as to the details of this royalty agreement have gone unanswered.

Have these funds been brought to the County Council for appropriation?

Anyone at the County Council, Inspector General's office, or State Attorney General's office paying attention?
Montgomery County Schools Partnership Rls 6.3.05

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Presentations & Spre

Consultant Payment Approved - No Discussion

At today's Board of Education meeting the Board approved a $125,000 payment to a consultant by unanimous consent.  There was no discussion of this expenditure, nor has there been any explanation or detail provided as to the purpose or scope of "support" to be provided.

The first time this consultant appeared in Board of Education minutes was in March of 2009 as a sole source procurement* (no other bids were taken). See the notation from the March 10, 2009, memo from Superintendent Weast below.

However, an IQinVision press release from March 2008 (a year before) announced that this consultant was already working with MCPS. Under what Board authority was this consultant being paid before March of 2009? 

This is an election year for 4 Board of Education seats currently held by Patricia O'Neill, Shirley Brandman, Judy Docca and Michael Durso. This is just one example of the level of oversight exerted by these Board members over the MCPS Operating budget.

*This blog post was updated as of 7:45 pm, January 12, 2009.