Breaking news: 800 removed from MCPS dependent rolls!

In January 2009, the Maryland General Assembly, Office of Legislative Audits released their Fiscal Management Practices Audit Report for Montgomery County Public Schools.

One of the recommendations of the State Audit was:

MCPS should enhance its procedures to verify health care costs by ensuring the eligibility of program participants and the propriety of paid claims.

Here is why the State Audit made that recommendation:

Although MCPS had implemented certain practices designed to control health care cost (such as procuring medical and prescription services under cooperative arrangements), it had not taken certain substantive actions to control costs. Specifically, MCPS did not verify the eligibility of program participants and their listed dependents or audit the propriety of claims paid by program administrators. MCPS provides health benefit coverage to active and retired employees through a program self-insured by the Employee Benefit Plan Trust Fund (in conjunction with Montgomery County and several other local government units). MCPS paid approximately $175.8 million in claim payments for 57,000 employees, retirees, and their dependents during fiscal year 2007.

Buried in the minutes of the recently released May 13, 2009, MCPS Board of Education committee meeting (off camera meeting - usually no press or public in attendance) we learn that MCPS has initiated a Dependent Eligibility Audit in response to the State recommendation. And look at what they have found, 800 people who were listed as dependents of MCPS staff that did not actually qualify as dependents!

From the Board Committee minutes:

The dependent eligibility audit will be completed by the end of Fiscal Year 2009. So far 800 inappropriate dependents have been dropped off and termination letters will be sent out. MCPS staff will continue to update the committee on these issues.

Thanks to the Maryland General Assembly for initiating and funding the Audits of local school districts. Without their initiative, the MCPS Dependent Eligibility Audit might never have been initiated by local staff. The next question is how much was the failure of MCPS to utilize best practice accounting procedures costing taxpayers?

UPDATE: Board of Education minutes from December 9, 2008, show that the Board hired a company called Secova, Inc. at a cost of $213,238 plus direct postage costs to verify the "authenticity of the dependents of the eligible employees participating in Montgomery County Public Schools benefit pool." The Board stated that such a review had not been conducted "in a number of years."

What MCPS deletes, we provide...

In multiple posts on this blog we have directed readers to the MCPS Procurement Manual online link as we discussed the failure of MCPS to follow state law in procuring technology and equipment.

So what's a Tech-Savvy school system to do? Take the Procurement Manual link off the MCPS website, of course! So now when you go to the link for the MCPS Procurement Manual here is what you see...

But you may have heard the saying "You can't put the Genie back in the bottle?" And so readers of this blog, what MCPS deletes, the Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County, Maryland provides.

Here for your procurement education is the MCPS Procurement Manual as it appeared on the MCPS website just a few months ago, with all of the important references to State procurement law.
MCPS Feb 2007 Procurement Manual

Helium Hands - All Rise at the Meeting

In a previous post, I cautioned that the Montgomery County Board of Education would likely raise their hands in unison to approve the use of American Express Purchase Cards on the July 14, 2009 consent agenda and without any questions.

Well, it isn't often that I can admit to being wrong. In fact, the BOE pulled the item off the consent agenda and allowed questions. Actually, only one question from Ms. Berthiaume, concerning rebates and actual costs. You will have to listen to the video clip for yourself to see if her question was answered:

Did you hear anyone answer Ms. Berthiaume question on rebates? Mr. Bowers has answers to other information, Mr. Barclay has seen the documentation, and the information has been brought before the Fiscal Management Committee. Funny thing too, that when I went to the minutes of the Committee, I didn't see any mention of credit card rebates - not at the July 22, 2008 meeting, the September 22, 2008 meeting, the November 18, 2008 meeting, or the January 15, 2009 meeting, the last meeting with minutes posted on the web. Most parents didn't even realize that MCPS staff members had credit cards until some parents started filing requests under the Maryland Public Information act.

But Shirley Brandman cuts off the discussion and simply moves on.

So the question remains - what are the rebates and what are the costs? Any oversight?

Show us the documents.

And, as a final note, imagine that Ms. Berthiaume's question was a BCR (single paragraph response) or ECR (multiple paragraph response) on the Maryland High School Assessments (HSA)? Both Mr. Bowers and Mr. Barclay would score a zero for not answering the question.

Thanks to the Maryland State Department of Education for removing the written component of the HSAs from the exam. How can we expect our kids to pass when the school leadership can't model a good response?

Churchill HS IAF Audit 071409

$1,000 Chorus Class Lives!

While the MCPS Board of Education and Superintendent pretend that they are "eliminating" a large number of illegal curricular fees, the reality is that local schools will continue to charge students fees to attend public school classes for the 2009-10 school year.

On July 14, 2009, I updated the MCPS Board of Education on our family's experience being billed over $1,000 for a chorus class at Winston Churchill High School. (Please note this was a public school class where our student was receiving credit and a grade.) I brought bills from the last 3 school years showing that illegal curricular fees continue to be charged for chorus classes at Churchill HS.

In addition, for the upcoming 2009-10 school year the Churchill chorus classes will create groups of have's and have-not's. Those students that pay the illegal curricular fees will be featured in competition performances, while students that do not pay the fees will be relegated to performances for parents and other students. Both sets of students will be showing up every day and sitting in the same classroom, but with very different experiences based on their willingness to pay an illegal curricular fee for public school classes. Here is the statement I presented to the MCPS Board of Education:

Montgomery County Board of Education

July 14, 2009

One year ago this week I came before this Board with information about illegal curricular fees being charged at Winston Churchill High School. As an example, I brought with me the $1,120 Show Choir bill that our family received when our student was in the Show Choir class at Churchill.

I am back one year later to report "good news"! While the illegal curricular fees are still being charged at Churchill High School, the fee for the Show Choir classes goes down in alternate years! So the $1,000 Chorus class only exists every other year. For boys the fee to take the Show Choir class has been as follows:

2005-06 $1,120

2006-07 $ 767

2007-08 $1,022

2008-09 $ 835

The plan for the 2009-10 Show Choir fee is to continue charging the fee but EXCLUDE students that do not pay the fee from performances. For those students that do not pay the fee and purchase a costume they will sit at the side of the room and watch the other students prepare for performances. No fee = no costume = no performance.

And there is more "good news"! Students that are enrolled in the Churchill Show Choir called ShowStoppers are now able to earn Honors credit for being in this class. How does Churchill High School manage this?

While it is true that MCPS doesn’t offer an Honors Show Choir class, that problem is easily solved by changing the MCPS Course Code on report cards. Students who are enrolled in the Churchill Show Choir class known as ShowStoppers now receive MCPS Course Code 6743 for Choir – Chamber - Honors on their report cards instead of the Show Choir Course Code of 6745 which does not gives honors credit.

You will see the Course descriptions for each MCPS Course Code attached. The Winston Churchill High School Choral Music Department Student and Parent Guidebook lists the Showstoppers Show Choir as an “honors” show choir.

And finally, to show how important signing the Show Choir contract is at Churchill High School a signed contract earns each student one quiz grade with grade penalties for turning in contracts late.

Thanks for the opportunity to update the Board on the illegal curricular fees at Churchill High School.

WCHS Show Choir Bills

Helium Hands Highlight Board of Education Meeting on July 14

July 14, 2009, is a big day for the Montgomery County Board of Education. One of the items on the agenda concerns ratification of the purchase card contract with American Express.

This no cost contract is such a deal for MCPS that it can be on the consent agenda, because a discussion of the merits isn't necessary. Its all set forth in Dr. Weast's memo. Here is what our data driven Superintendent has to say, in his own words, about the past performance of the vendor:

Based on the company’s past performance and that American Express Corporate Services has agreed to the request for a special extension, I am recommending that the Board of Education extend the contract through September 2010.

That's it folks, no data on how many cards, how many employees get the cards, or what employees are allowed to charge. Even the contract is omitted from the package, so we can't see the interest rates or better yet, how much in the way of rebates come back to our school system by way of this really nifty contract.

But, does it really matter? This contract was brought before the BOE in 2000, 2003, and 2006 for approval - also on the consent agenda, and also without the contract or other documentation on performance, rebates, costs, or volume of cards used.

Each of these items have a note that says this procurement is at no cost to the school system. Do we really believe that? We must have a wonderful school system then, because our employees only charge what they should, approvals and reviews are done in a timely manner, and balances are always paid on time, so finance charges and potential misuse of the cards aren't an issue. Here is a snip from a 2009 audit by the Maryland General Assembly, Office of Legislative Audits:

MCPS needs to improve controls and policies governing the use of credit cards and travel. For example, new MCPS credit cards were sent directly to the employee who placed the card order with the bank rather than to an independent employee. Also, certain credit cards purchases were not logged nor subject to supervisory review.

Our Board of Education will likely continue to raise their collective helium hands and vote en masse to approve this contract again - after all, we're Montgomery County, who cares about the reports of the state auditors, we're superior performers, and supporting data - that's just for kids.

Parents fret over Montgomery schools' readiness plan | Washington Examiner

Parents fret over Montgomery schools' readiness plan | Washington Examiner

...On the other end of the spectrum, some parents are concerned that the standards are too rigid for the county's students for whom college is not the realistic next step.
Gordie Brenne, a parent at Kensington's Albert Einstein High School, said the Seven Keys make no allowance for nearly half of the schools' freshmen who, based on estimates, will fail to graduate.
Brenne wrote a letter to Superintendent Jerry Weast arguing that the studies used to create the Seven Keys were biased toward students most likely to attend college anyway. And the necessity of Algebra II, he said, was not concluded in any of the studies.
Brenne and parents like him worry that initiatives that have worked for less successful students will be crowded out by the Seven Keys approach.
"We need to have room for more experiments, to engage our kids in more novel ways," Brenne said...

Shared via AddThis

The Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County, Maryland printed Mr. Brenne's letter and statement to MCPS Board of Education on May 2, 2009. Read Mr. Brenne's letter and statement, and the statement of Mary and Tom Peterson here.

Summer Learning

Open Letter to the Johns Hopkins Center for Summer Learning:

Dear Directors Fairchild and Libit:

I am writing you concerning the recent award to Montgomery County Public Schools of the "Champion of Summer Learning Award." While everyone in Montgomery County agrees that the ELO-SAIL is a valuable program, parents of students with disabilities were extremely discouraged to see MCPS awarded as a "champion of summer learning" when MCPS has engaged in a campaign over the last several years to eliminate, reduce, and cut back extended school year services for students with disabilities.

As you know, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act provides for extended school year services during the summer for students with disabilities who meet certain criteria. MCPS had to be sued many years ago in federal court in order to force them to comply with this portion of the law. MCPS was monitored for several years on their compliance and provision of services.

Since the monitoring has ceased, however, MCPS has systematically reduced the amount of extended school year services available during the summer, found more children "ineligible" than in previous years, and reduced the quantity of services that they do provide to eligible children.

Children with disabilities, including severe disabilities like autism, come from families of all socio-economic backgrounds and ethnicities. Surely the Center for Summer Learning sees the corresponding need for high-quality summer education programs provided to students with disabilities, who, just like the students in the ESO-SAIL program, could benefit from programs targeted to maintain their skills and boost those skills in preparation for the upcoming school year. Unfortunately, many students with disabilities who need this summer programming are not getting it.

Would you be willing to issue a statement from your organization (the National Center for Summer Learning) supporting providing summer services to students with disabilities and encouraging MCPS to follow both the Letter and the Spirit of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act with regard to Extended School Year Services? I anxiously await your response.

Sincerely,

Lyda Astrove
Rockville, MD

Weast: No e-mail but tech-savvy?

Today is Leadership Day on the Dangerously Irrelevant blog! This is a day to discuss technology use in school systems and in specific, how can administrators use technology effectively. The Dangerously Irrelevant blog author, Scott McLeod, offers some suggested questions for discussion today. Here is one of the suggested questions:

Do administrators have to be technology-savvy themselves in order to be effective technology leaders in their organizations?

Two observations on this question from a Montgomery County parent perspective:

First, here in Montgomery County, we have a Tech-Savvy Superintendent, or so we were told by eSchool News in 2008. But a close look at the award revealed that one of the sponsors was Promethean. Within months of that award, Montgomery County Public Schools would go from a few hundred Promethean Boards in classrooms to 3,300 in a no bid, no contract, lease that was not approved by a public vote of the Board of Education.

Meanwhile, it seems that Promethean has competitors. There is SmartBoard and the Eno Board. It is particularly interesting that the Eno Board allows users to write on it with dry-erase markers, something that Promethean Boards prohibit. The inability to use dry-erase markers on the 3,300 Promethean Boards in MCPS has necessitated the use of covers and warnings to community users of school classrooms. A side by side comparison of interactive white boards might have yielded some interesting public discussion and competitive bids would have guaranteed taxpayers the best possible price. Was our Superintendent aware of the alternatives and differences in these products? Our Superintendent appears to leave all technology procurements up to staff.

Second, MCPS' tech-savvy superintendent doesn't permit the community to communicate with him directly via an e-mail address. We know that he has an individual e-mail address because he has given it out to select individuals and professional publications. The lack of a public e-mail address gives the impression of a superintendent who is not up on the latest communication tools.

It could be argued that in order to be an educated consumer of technology one should be comfortable and familiar with the products being purchased. If a superintendent isn't tech-savvy it would be like someone buying a car that didn't know how to drive. Would that person be able to make the best purchase?

At a minimum superintendents who do not make themselves available via a public e-mail address give the impression of not being comfortable with this commonly used communication tool.

Please post your thoughts on the question posed, or on any other question on this topic, to the comments section of this blog post. This blog post has been linked back to the Dangerously Irrelevant blog and your comments will become part of the national discussion!

Dumpster Yields Document

More artificial turf fields planned for Montgomery County?

A Montgomery County Department of Parks document has now been posted to the Save Sligo Golf website that shows the possible options for the Sligo Golf Course if the land is no longer used as a golf course. According to the Save Sligo Golf.com website the document from the Montgomery County Department of Parks was found in a dumpster.

Why is this document of interest to this blog? Because two of the proposed uses for the Sligo Creek Golf course have MCPS tie ins as part of their "sales" presentations.

1. One of the options for the Sligo Golf Course is to turn the land over to MSI Soccer, Inc. (MSI). MSI wants to turn the land into 4 artificial turf and 2 grass soccer fields. (See page 36) According to the document found in the dumpster, MSI "envisions a partnership with Montgomery County Schools". Would that be Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)? Interesting because MCPS has just turned 2 high school football fields over to private soccer organizations and neither one was MSI.

The document seems to state that MSI was not able to have an in depth discussion with MCPS about the use of school fields. Yet, two other private organizations have been able to secure leases to use artificial turf fields at two high schools in the last year.

It is important to note that MCPS did not put out a Request For Proposal for either of these field leases. In the case of the Richard Montgomery HS "deal" the private soccer company that was given the lease was allegedly selected by the principal, not by a competitive bid process.

When the County Council approved the conversion of Richard Montgomery High School's football field into an artificial turf field, with 837 hours leased out to a private adult soccer company, the proviso was that there would be a six month review of this arrangement. The review would encompass "information about scheduling, fees, and community impact before a plan is developed for expansion of this effort to other high schools." Part of the selling of the RMHS plan was that the renting out of the artificial turf field at hours not used by the private soccer company would yield a profit for MCPS.

The Richard Montgomery HS private lease commenced February 15, 2009. Obviously, there hasn't been a six month review since the first 6 months of the lease hasn't even run yet.

Nonetheless, the County Council has already approved another private lease of public land for another MCPS high school artificial turf football field. In this new lease at Walter Johnson High School, the private soccer company will be given 895.5 hours of field time per year. The amount of time leased out in this new deal has increased almost 60 hours, and the lease at RMHS has only been in effect for 5 months.

One of the many issues surrounding these arrangements that the County Council hasn't discussed is that when artificial turf that is put down on public land it becomes something to be protected, maintained and cleaned. At $600,000 to $1.2 million per field, these fields are not something that you can just leave lying around for the public to use. They need to be fenced in and protected with 24/7 security cameras. There is the cost of cleaning and maintenance to be considered. Will these field "deals" make a profit or will they require continued county funding?

2. Another proposed use for the Sligo Creek Golf Course is to turn it into a Disc (think Frisbee) Golf Course. As part of that proposal (see page 39) the presenter said that a long term goal would be to have a disc golf education program in schools. Now seriously, does this seem like a realistic goal, or are "schools and kids" being used in both of these presentations to evoke some sort of warm, fuzzy feeling?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UPDATE July 29, 2009: Sligo Creek Golf Course to Stay Open Another Year

Sligo Creek Golf Course, the nine-hole Silver Spring course beloved by women, seniors and minority golfers, will remain open at least another year, under a new plan outlined by Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett (D).

UPDATE: September 12, 2009: At County Council - Introduction - Special appropriation to the MNCPPC’s FY10 Operating Budget, Department of Parks, Enterprise Fund - $150,000 for the Sligo Creek Golf Course

A PUBLIC HEARING is scheduled for Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 1:30 pm.

http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/council/pdf/agenda/col/2009/090915/20090915_2H.pdf

Action Request from the MoCo Civic Federation

The Montgomery County Civic Federation (MCCF) has put out this request (below) asking citizens to tell the County Council, we don't want overcrowded schools. We don't want failing streams and a polluted Chesapeake Bay. We don't want inadequate failing infrastructure. We don't want failing faulty watermains. We want thoughtful consideration of real issues, and decisions that support a sustainable quality of life in our county.

July 12, 2009

ACTION REQUESTED - PLEASE CONTACT COUNTY COUNCIL

THE CIVIC FEDERATION BELIEVES THE COUNTY COUNCIL HAS OVERLOADED THEIR SCHEDULE FOR LAND USE RELATED ISSUES

The MCCF is troubled that the list of issues this Council intends to address in their remaining 17 months in office is too lengthy for them to pay adequate attention to details which will impact resident's quality of life and the health of the natural environment. The list of issues the Council intends to consider includes:

- 5 more master plan revisions (6, if they reopen the Clarksburg Master Plan);
- creation of a new mixed use zoning category for use in 4 of those plans;
- changes to the County growth policy; and,
- a rewrite of the Housing Chapter of the County General Plan.

The Federation has sent a letter to all of the members of Council explaining our concerns.
WE ARE ASKING YOU TO EMAIL COUNCILMEMBERS AND TELL THEM YOU'RE CONCERNED, TOO !

To have an impact, the Council will need to get several hundred emails starting now and continuing over the August break, so please forward this email to all county residents on your contact list. Thank you in advance for weighing in on this important matter.
To make it easier for you to contact Council, we are providing--
an introductory sentence for you to copy into the body of your email, and
a choice of 4 bulleted items--use any or all that address your issues of concern.
______________________________

Dear County Councilmembers,
I am concerned that you have scheduled too many land use related issues for consideration in the remaining 17 months of this Council, and this work program overload could prevent you from paying sufficient attention to the important details of each of these issues.
· I fear the amount of new development being considered in master plan revisions will increase school overcrowding and that lack of adequate roads and transit planning will only worsen traffic congestion.
· I am troubled that the proposed Growth Policy changes would allow increased development without insuring adequate infrastructure to support the growth.
· I am concerned the new mixed use zone will increase development but not provide safeguards to protect the environment, especially stream watersheds.
· I strongly believe county policies must preserve existing affordably priced housing.
Please reduce the number of issues you intend to address. It is better to carefully consider fewer items, than to rush approval. Thank you.
(be sure to include your name & address, and send to county.council@montgomerycountymd.gov)

MCBRE: Mystery Solved

Thanks once again to the folks at Harvard for shedding some sunshine on how our public education dollars are spent here in Montgomery County Maryland.

Last month, the Harvard Business School published a case study on the benefits of MCBRE, the Montgomery County Business Roundtable for Education. MCPS took credit and published the press release on its website, even though the press release was generated by MCBRE's staff.

What is MCBRE and why should we care? Other than the annual Champions for Children dinner and Golf Classic, most folks don't know much about MCBRE or its funding. According to the press release and information reflected in the Board of Education minutes, MCBRE was formed by local businesses. Read further into the materials and you will note that although the businesses "founded" MCBRE, our own Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Jerry Weast, was really the driving force behind the organization. The start up ran into funding complications and was supported entirely by MCPS, operating as an affiliate within the MCPS Department of Family and Community Partnerships.

A search of the MCPS website reveals only fourteen mentions of MCBRE in Board of Education minutes, and nothing after 2004. Beginning with the 2004 -2005 school year, MCPS eliminated its support of MCBRE, forcing the organization to become disentangled from MCPS. As the executive director is quoted in the Harvard report, "It just didn't make sense that a 501c3 business roundtable organization was funded by MCPS contributions and run by MCPS employees."

Little about MCBRE made sense, and when this writer and others tried to find out more, we were not given the information requested - even though as a 501c3, certain documents and annual reports are supposed to be publicly available.

In 2006, the Montgomery County Council of PTAs asked to participate in some of the decision making sessions of the organization, as was envisioned in the initial plan for MCBRE, and was told that the decision was up to Dr. Weast.

MCBRE - The President met with Jane Kubasik, Executive Director of Montgomery County Business Roundtable for Education (MCBRE) re: Champions for Children dinner and our commitment for that night; possible financial help for our presidents and principals dinner and contacts at the Marriott Conference Center. MCBRE meets three times yearly and includes recommendations for MCPS, but MCCPTA doesn’t attend. Jane Kubasik said that it is up to Dr. Weast to allow MCCPTA to participate in the meetings. Minutes MCCPTA Board of Directors Meeting, August 3, 2006.

From the Harvard Business School report, we, the taxpayers and constituents of public education in the county have a view into its activities, functions, and funding. The community now has a list of the selected school-business partnerships and initiatives supported by the business roundtable, and if your school is lucky enough to house one of these programs, you now can properly thank the local businesses that made this happen. We finally have a glimpse into its finances, although the "Statement of Activities" isn't quite the same information as usually found in an annual report.

So - thanks again to the Harvard Business School for finally letting the taxpayers of Montgomery County know about this organization.

Of course, if you want to read the report yourself, according to the press release, you must purchase a copy directly from HBR. Nothing is free in MCPS, not even information about our own school system. Better yet, go to MCBRE, and ask them for a copy of the report.

A failing grade for Md. math - baltimoresun.com

A failing grade for Md. math - baltimoresun.com

...And the problem has been getting worse. The need for remedial math classes among Maryland high school graduates who had taken a college preparatory curriculum and went on to one of the state's two- or four-year colleges rose from 23 percent in 1997 to 32 percent in 2007, according to an Abell Foundation report released this spring.While the problem is worse at community colleges, 15 percent of the freshmen at the University of Maryland, College Park must take a remedial math class before being able to move into college-level classes, said Denny Gullick, a math professor there. Some of those students come from out of state.

For Gabrielle Martino, holder of a doctorate in math from the Johns
Hopkins University and a co-author of the Abell Foundation report, the
bottom line is that students are being harmed because they have to pay for the remedial classes. When they get to college, "they are uniformly shocked that they were put into remedial math," she said...

Lacking the basics
High school students in 2006-2007 who needed remedial math in college

Region - Montgomery
With college prep - 30%
Without college prep - 42%

Posted using ShareThis

MCPS presents why Promethean boards are essential

Source:  NECC Conference Brochure

Poll: After School or Promethean Boards?

POLL: Click here to vote your preference for your tax dollars to go to afterschool activities for all middle school students, or to make the next lease payment on 125 Promethean Boards. Read more about this choice:

The Montgomery County Council has decided that they are happy to sit back and let the Montgomery County Public School system administrators spend tax dollars without following state law and without oversight. What does this mean to you the citizen? It means that cuts must be made in other services to support the spendthrift habits of MCPS.

What has MCPS been doing? The MCPS Board of Education has been allowing administrators like MCPS COO Larry Bowers to sign off on major multi-million dollar procurements without Board of Education approval and without obtaining competitive bids for the products as required by State law.

Here is one example in the news this week, about $156,000 is being cut from an afterschool program for middle school students called RecExtra. You can read about this cut in the Gazette. 13 middle schools have seen their RecExtra funding cut for the upcoming school year.

What is an example of a MCPS purchase that was made without competitive bids and that was signed for by MCPS COO Larry Bowers instead of the Board of Education President? Promethean Boards.

Last summer MCPS COO Larry Bowers signed a 4 year LEASE for 2,600 Promethean Boards (at approximately $5,000 per classroom). That's right, the Promethean Boards in your child's classroom aren't even paid for yet! They are on a 4 year lease with an annual payment of $3,355,400.

But that's OK because Promethean Boards are more important than after school activities for thousands of middle school students. Right? Well it's your choice. These are your elected County Councilmembers cutting after school activities in favor of leased Promethean Boards.

Do you want to participate in a poll on this issue?

Click here to vote your preference for your tax dollars to go to afterschool activities for all middle school students, or to make the next lease payment on 125 Promethean Boards.

The return of just 125 Promethean Boards to the supplier, out of a total of 3,300 currently in MCPS, would fund the RecExtra program for next year. The lease agreement allows for Boards to be returned.

Want more information on the Promethean Board purchases, including the Weast memo switch at the County Council? Keep reading...

3,300 Promethean Boards in Montgomery County Public School classrooms

6 Promethean Boards were ordered for MCPS administrators on September 26, 2007, at a cost of $11,256. Click here to view purchase orders. This purchase was not reviewed by the MCPS Board of Education. These boards are not used in classrooms and are for the sole use of MCPS administrators in the Carver administration offices.

2,600 Promethean Boards were ordered by MCPS on June 12, 2008, under a lease agreement with Dell Financial Services. The lease was signed by MCPS COO Larry Bowers and is a 4 year term with an option to buy at the end of the 4 year period. Included with the lease documents is a June 9, 2008 (FIRST VERSION) memo from the Superintendent to the MCPS Board of Education on the plans to expand implementation of Interactive Classrooms. Click here to view the lease, purchase order and first version of June 9th memo from Superintendent. The annual lease payment for these boards is $3,355,400 per year for a total 4 year payment of $13,421,600. There was no MCPS Board of Education approval of the terms of this lease or the purchase of Promethean Boards. Documents received via a Maryland Public Information Act request to MCPS.

On June 23, 2008, the MCPS Board of Education approved a one year lease payment to Dell Financial Services for the lease of computers, associated hardware and services from Dell Marketing, LP for $5,000,000 . There is no mention of the purchase of 6, 2,600 or 3,300 Promethean Boards in MCPS Board of Education minutes. The contract with Dell Marketing, LP has not been made public. It is not known what this $5,000,000 lease payment covered. What is known is that the Board of Education approval of the June 23rd lease payment to Dell Financial Services came after the June 12th execution of the lease and purchase order for 2,600 Promethean Boards.

700 Promethean Boards are not accounted for in the above purchase orders. There is no public information that details when or how these boards were purchased.

November 26, 2008 Letter to County Council Education Committee Chair Valerie Ervin from Superintendent Weast with attachments. The cover letter is stamped 039369 and stamped with an apparent receipt stamp of 2008 DEC 11 PM 2:09. The attachments include a November 26, 2008, memorandum from Superintendent Weast to the MCPS Board of Education on Promethean Board purchase, and a June 9, 2008 Memo from Superintendent Weast to MCPS Board of Education on Promethan Board Expansion. This is the SECOND VERSION of the June 9, 2008 memo. Document received via a request from a citizen to a Councilmember's office.

January 7, 2009 Memo from Superintendent Weast to MCPS Board of Education titled: Responses to Board Members' Follow-up Questions on Promethean Boards. This memo refers to a Maryland Education Enterprise Consortium (MEEC) agreement. The MEEC agreement was not included in the memo to the Board of Education. A request for the MEEC agreement was made via a Maryland Public Information Act Request, but the agreement was not produced by the MCPS Public Information Office. MCPS only produced the MEEC Request for Proposal (RFP) which makes no mention of Promethean Boards. For your information, the first page of the MEEC RFP is included in the link to the January 7, 2009 memo. Note that the MEEC RFP that was allegedly connected to the purchase of the MCPS Promethean Boards in June 2008 was issued September 22, 2006.

February 2, 2009 Memorandum from County Council Education Committee staff on Promethean Boards in Montgomery County Public Schools. This includes the November 26, 2008 Letter from Superintendent Weast to Councilmember Ervin (above) however, Attachment B of this letter is now the FIRST VERSION of the June 9, 2008 memorandum to the Board of Education. The Weast memo that was originally sent to Councilmember Ervin on November 26, 2008 has been switched to a different version!

February 23, 2009 WTOP's Kate Ryan reports on today's County Council Education Committee meeting to discuss the appearance of 3,300 Promethean Boards in MCPS classroom in August of 2008. Hear the reports: Superintendent Weast on "parsing words" and BoE President Brandman on Board's "intention".

Do you have concerns about MCPS procurement practices? Click here.

Chicago Gazette quotes Parents' Coalition blog

Gazette Chicago: Turf Battle at Sheridan Park: artificial or natural?

...According to Save San Carlos Parks and a Maryland group, Parents Coalition of Montgomery County, the Synthetic Turf Council, which has a representative of FieldTurfTarkett on its board, successfully lobbied the federal Consumer Product Safety Commission in May 2008 to make sure that artificial turf would not be classified by the CPSC as a “children’s product,” as that would require more stringent testing for lead...

765 Salaries above $100,000...

...and that was in 2006.

In 2006, The Examiner filed a Public Information Act request with MCPS for certain salary and employee information. The Examiner did not receive all of the information that it requested, but it did receive the list of all 21,497 MCPS employees in 2006 and their salaries for that year. The complete list of 2006 MCPS salaries is found here.

From that list we learn that there were 765 employees making over $100,000 in 2006. Of those 765 employees, only 4 have the word "teacher" in their title. The complete 15 page list of the "over $100,000 employees" from 2006 is shown below.

The 2006 list of MCPS employees shows 239 Instructional Specialists. But don't let that title fool you. Those employees aren't in classrooms. The list of Instructional Specialists from 2006 is here.

And here's another group that your kids probably haven't met, "Directors". What do they "direct?" In 2006 there were 68 "Directors" with the lowest salary of the group at $98,921. Ask a "director" if they have any control over what goes on in your local school. The answer? The principal is in charge of your local school. See the 2006 list of "Directors" here.

What do MCPS employee salaries look like in 2009? Just ask. Public information is available for any member of the public that makes an inquiry. Read about the Maryland Public Information Act here, and find out more about the MCPS Public Information office here.

MCPS$100,000+2006

The Gazette posted a short list of MCPS Proposed Salaries for FY 2006 here.

Montgomery College classes "filled" with MCPS students who need remedial math

With little regard for whether or not they are ready, MCPS students are being almost universally pushed into algebra, and a Montgomery College math professor reports that excessive acceleration is backfiring.

From today's Gazette:

"Our goal is to get … 80 percent of our students to be college-ready by 2014," schools Superintendent Jerry D. Weast said at the time. "It's an ambitious, but very reachable, goal as long as our students know the pathway that it will take to get there."

But the pace could be too fast, said Dina Yagodich, an adjunct math professor at Montgomery College's Germantown campus with three children in county schools. While she is not against acceleration, some students can't handle the advanced pace, she said.

Her pre-algebra classes at the college are "filled" with students who graduated from the school system, she noted.

[...]

"I am concerned for the push to get 80 percent of students a full grade level ahead when 26.8 percent of them aren't even at the eighth-grade level," Yagodich said. "The push for acceleration has concerned me, and although it is good for many students, I worry that many students are pushed beyond their abilities and are never able to catch back up."

Weast: Highest Compensation Package

From the Loudoun Independent article entitled, Supt. Hatrick's Salary at $232,680 is Unchanged from 2008-09 a review of the salaries of local superintendents including this summary of Superintendent Weast's 2007-08 compensation:

Jerry Weast is the Superintendent of Montgomery County Public Schools, Maryland’s largest public school system with 139,000 students and 22,122 employees. At $489,763, received the highest compensation package of any profiled in the 12-school systems comparison. Weast received a 2007-08 salary of $242,686; no bonus; $151,698 in deferred compensation; $24,339 in insurance; $7,000 in expenses; $24,738 in unused leave; $5,687 for a vehicle; and $33,615 in pension.

Classrooms of the future - planning begins

In The Baltimore Sun's Inside Ed column Liz Bowie reports on Who is deciding what will be taught in classrooms of the future?

From the Inside Ed column:

We've recently found out who will be writing and reviewing the new national or "common core" standards for math and language arts. For those of you who would like to know who is likely to be the group deciding what is important to be taught in classrooms, here's the list.

This year, Maryland and 45 other states decided to jointly develop a common group of standards...

...For a good story on the subject, go to Education Week.