Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Contract, Contracts’ Category

More than 1100 students in the parishes of Caddo and Webster have signed up for course choice programs with a provider whose chairman with close ties to former President George W. Bush and 2012 Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

An outfit named FastPath Learning of Austin, Texas, has somehow managed to obtain student information to sign up the students without the knowledge of the student or of their parents.

If true, that’s fraud, pure and simple—and a blatant violation of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

And the chairman of the board for FastPath? None other than Dr. Rod Paige, former U.S. Secretary of Education during President George W. Bush’s first term and a member of Mitt Romney’s Education Policy Advisory Group during last year’s presidential campaign.

Paige, it should be noted, also once served as superintendent of Houston’s schools and during his tenure there, he became mired in an ugly scandal when it was learned that the Houston system, seventh largest in the nation, had falsified its dropout statistics.

Course Choice, which is under the supervision of Department of Education (DOE) Deputy Superintendent of Portfolio Dave “Lefty” Lefkowith, is a DOE program whereby Louisiana public school students are allowed to sign up for online computer courses offered by providers approved by DOE.

Lefkowith, who once worked with Enron and with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, commutes from his home in Los Angeles and is paid $146,000 per year by DOE.

Tuition for the courses ranges from $700 to $1,275 each and providers get one-half of their tuition fees up front upon registering students for courses. The second half is paid when a student successfully completes a course and the course providers have full autonomy in making the determination of when—or if—a student completes a course. The incentive to the provider, of course, is to have as many students as possible “complete” the courses.

Fox, welcome to the hen house.

The tuition is free to the student with the state picking up the tab. Students also receive a free iPad upon registering. There was no word if the 1,100 students who were unknowingly registered received iPads.

Students are allowed to take up to five classes outside their home school at taxpayer expense.

Students and parents in the two parishes say they never requested nor approved the registering of the students for the courses. One student was registered for a class he had already successfully completed in the classroom—with an A grade.

State Superintendent of Education John White, asked about the apparent lack of oversight, said Course Choice providers underwent a “rigorous” four-part approval process before being allowed to offer classes and that checks and balances are in place to insure that students do not end up in an academically unsound course.

Really?

On Wednesday, White announced DOE would attempt to finance the Course Choice program through its own resources following last week’s Louisiana Supreme Court ruling upholding a lower court decision that the method of using Minimum Foundation Program funds to pay for the vouchers was unconstitutional.

White said that more than 3,000 courses have been chosen thus far at an average cost of $700 each, a total of $2.1 million. Registration will remain open through August, he said.

The revelation of the 1,100 registrations which, if true, could be construed as fraud and theft could also involve a violation of the federal Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) since FastPath would necessarily require certain student information, including names, addresses, social security numbers, etc., in order to register the students.

The question then becomes just who provided that information to FastPath? There are already questions about White’s leaking information about evaluations of three Caddo Parish elementary teachers through an intermediary to the Baton Rouge Advocate last October.

That intermediary was Rayne Martin, a former employer of DOE who currently serves as executive director of Stand for Children Louisiana.

In the wake of the flap over the negative evaluations of the teachers, the Advocate published a letter to the editor which defended the Value Added Model used by DOE to evaluate the teachers and which even cited statistics from the leaked document.

Turns out that letter was written by Monica Candal, policy and data analyst for Stand for Children Louisiana, leaving one to wonder about the connection between White and Stand for Children.

Who knew?

Louisiana Voice attempted to contact FastPath by telephone. An automated message told us to press 1 if we were a student already enrolled in FastPath or to press 2 for “all other inquiries.”

We pressed 2 and got another automated message that said, “We’re sorry we are unable to answer your call at this time.” So we called back and pressed 1 and got an automated message that said (take a deep breath and count to 10), “We’re sorry we are unable to answer your call at this time.” This was at 10:45 a.m. on Thursday, so it wasn’t because they close during lunch.

Next, we went online and clicked on “Contact us” and several boxes popped up on our computer screen asking for our name, our organization, our email address and the city and state from which we were emailing them. Strangely, it did not request our telephone number, though we would have been happy to provide that as well.

The following note was typed into the message box:

“This is for Compliance Officer David Callaway:

How did FastPath obtain the information (names, schools, home addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, etc.) on the 1100 students in Caddo and Webster parishes who were signed up for your Course Choice courses without, the students and parents claim, their knowledge or consent?

It would appear that you would have to be in possession of certain information in order to enroll these students and I simply want to know who provided that data to you.

Thanks.”

A few minutes after we sent the message, we received a computer-generated message in our email in-box that said, “Thanks for contacting us! We’ll get back to you soon.”

Does anyone care to take odds on whether or not we’ll ever hear back from them?

The leaks would seem to validate concerns about a recent agreement, since cancelled because of a public outcry, to furnish personal information on some 700,000 Louisiana school children to a data bank run by White’s former boss Joel Klein, now with inBloom, a data storage company (or data “parking garage,” to use White’s terminology) run by NewsCorp CEO Rupert Murdoch.

inBloom had offered no guarantees that the data could not be accessed by hackers and in fact, an unrelated privacy breach on Bloomberg News occurred when reporters extracted subscribers’ private information to break news stories. That breach would seem to lend credence to security concerns about inBloom.

Recent stories by LouisianaVoice have prompted a witch hunt at DOE in an effort to determine the source of recent stories. Personal printers have been removed so that documents must now be printed at a central location more easily monitored. IT personnel have been called in to review emails.

It seems to us, security—and Louisiana taxpayers—would somehow be better served through efforts to attempt to learn who provided FastPath with personal data on 1,100 students signed up for courses without their knowledge or consent.

Read Full Post »

Sometimes you just have to peel back the layers to see what really lies beneath the surface of political decisions.

And nothing in the state of Louisiana is more political than the method in which F. King Alexander was chosen as the next president of Louisiana’s flagship university.

To put it as succinctly as possible, the entire charade was a crock.

And that, unfortunately, is the sorry state of affairs that higher education in general and LSU in particular finds itself in today.

Gov. Bobby Jindal, the LSU Board of Supervisors and attorney Jimmy Faircloth simply have no shame. That group of power brokers—power abusers, really—feels so secure, so insulated, so detached from the voters, students and alumni of LSU that they have arbitrarily decided that court decisions be damned, they can do as they please.

Apparently it’s not enough that higher education has seen its budget slashed by 80 percent during this governor’s reign of terror.

Jindal, the Board and Faircloth are so cocky that they obviously believe that not even a court order handed down by a Baton Rouge district judge can dislodge the names of the candidates for the LSU presidency for which one F. King Alexander was eventually chosen.

And to be sure, the credentials of Alexander, questionable at best, have to leave one wondering: is this the best a well-paid Dallas search firm could do? No, really, is F. King Alexander really the most qualified person in all of America this firm could find to lead Louisiana State University? If so, one must also question the credentials of the search firm, R. William Funk and Associates which was paid $120,000 plus expenses to come up with a man whose highest academic achievement was that of assistant professor.

Perhaps Funk and Associates is better suited to recruiting managers for Popeye’s Fried Chicken.

But then again, perhaps not. Maybe Funk and Associates scoured the country in search of someone willing and ready to walk into this political graveyard called LSU. After all, who in his right mind would want to come to this state where higher education has been decimated, disparaged and dismantled by a governor who over his five-plus years in office, has not displayed the faintest hint of fiscal responsibility or moral conscience and who is accountable only to campaign contributors and aspirations—delusions, if you will—of higher office?

It might be appropriate at this juncture to itemize the list of transgressions, omissions, power abuses, acts of corruption, contracts, appointments, campaign contributions, lies and blunders by Jindal and associates but frankly, it would take too much space. Perhaps another time.

For now, let us concentrate on LSU.

Let us ask ourselves why the LSU Board of Supervisors—and Jindal; after all, the board members would wet their collective pants where they sit before they’d go to the bathroom without the governor’s permission—are so hell-bent on keeping the list of candidates a deep dark secret.

The argument presented by the board through Faircloth—who, by the way, is 0-for-however many times he has been to court on the administration’s behalf (we long ago lost track as the losses mounted)—is that Funk initially identified 100 potential candidates before winnowing the field down to 35. The curriculum vitae and other data were placed on a secure website for members of the search committee to review.

From that number came a final group of “six or seven” who were “worthy of more intensive interviews.” In the end, King was the only candidate recommended to the full board by the search committee.

How convenient. How absurd.

Compare that to 1977 or so when I happened to be serving as managing editor of the Ruston Daily Leader. Long-time Grambling State University President R.W.E. Jones announced his retirement and the Board of Trustees for Colleges and Universities began taking applications for Jones’s successor. Every step of the way, Bill Junkin, the equivalent to today’s commissioner of higher education, and Trustees Financial Committee Chairman Gordon Flores kept the media abreast of each and every applicant (qualified applicants, by the way) all the way up to the selection of a new president.

There was the announcement in 2009 of all five candidates to be interviewed for the presidency of Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond. They were identified by name, their current positions, and their qualifications for the position—something woefully missing from the LSU selection process.

Or take the more recent case involving the selection of a successor to Louisiana Tech University President Dan Reneau. The names and a brief biography of each candidate who had requested to be included in the selection process was published in all the area newspapers. When the selection committee had narrowed the candidate list to two, those individuals appeared in an open public forum. They addressed the public and availed themselves to questions from not only the Tech faculty, but the public at large.

This should have been the method employed in the selection of the new president of the state’s largest university, public or private. The difference, of course, was that the LSU president was chosen by Jindal’s hand-picked Board of Supervisors, the crème de la crème of political campaign contributors while the Tech president was chosen by the University of Louisiana System Board of Supervisors.

The LSU Board, however, used the oh-so-very-lame excuse that to release the names of applicants could inflict career damage to those who were not selected. Hogwash. What tripe. The very purpose of establishing a career track in higher education or any other field is to advance one’s career and you can’t advance your career without attempting to move up. And you can’t move up without making applications.

It wasn’t exactly a secret that Nick Saban, then at Michigan State, wanted to come to LSU and openly applied for the position. Nor was unknown that he was ready to move on to the Miami Dolphins a few years later. Last year, just about everyone knew Louisiana Tech’s Sonny Dykes would be moving on as had his predecessor Derek Dooley.

But to settle on a candidate who had advanced up the career ladder to only the level of assistant professor before succeeding his (ahem) father to the presidency of Murray State as if he were some kind of prince suddenly elevated to the throne? And then to the presidency of California State at Long Beach by virtue of his political connections to the then-chancellor of the University of California System? To that, we can only say, hmmm.

We will be taking a closer look at Alexander’s qualifications in the coming days.

Could the secrecy around the selection of King possibly have anything to do with the fact that a close relative of U.S. Sen. David Vitter had expressed an interest in the position—and possibly submitted an application? It’s well-established that there is no love lost between Jindal and the state’s junior senator, particularly from Jindal’s end of the relationship. (Remember how Jindal threw money at favored legislative and BESE candidates but steadfastly refused to endorse Vitter for re-election because he felt it “inappropriate” to interject himself into a state campaign?)

Or could it be that King was the choice all along and Jindal wanted desperately to conceal the inconvenient truth that there were, in fact, other more qualified candidates but who were unacceptable to this ego-driven governor?

One thing is for certain: Jindal, for whatever reason, desperately does not want the public—voters, students, LSU alumni or legislators—to know. And don’t think for a nano-second that the decision to resist releasing the names was that of the board. That’s laughable.

And stacking the board with supporters who contributed more than $175,000 to his various political campaigns can ensure the cooperation of board members long on loyalty but extremely short on honor, openness, transparency and accountability—the very selling points of one Bobby Jindal, who long ago eclipsed the late Dudley LeBlanc of patent medicine Hadacol fame as the foremost practitioner in Louisiana’s grand history of snake oil salesmen.

Read Full Post »

“…The Department is not in possession of any public record(s) responsive to the above-written request.”

—Letter from the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) to LouisianaVoice in which LDOE denies that it has any records showing that Superintendent of Education John White actually cancelled an agreement with inBloom to “park” sensitive personal student information in a data bank controlled by NewsCorp. CEO Rupert Murdoch. White announced on April 19 that he had rescinded the agreement between LDOE and inBloom.

LouisianaVoice made the request for the records on April 22 but did not receive a response until Thursday, May 9.

Read Full Post »

The late comedian Brother Dave Gardner once said, “I believe if a man’s down, kick him. If he survives it, he has a chance to rise above it.”

As a loyal follower of Brother Dave since the days of my long gone wasted youth of so many years ago, it is not mine to question. I was, after all, brought up in the Baptist Church (but switched to Methodist when I married) where I was taught that faith surpasses all understanding—or something like that.

So even though my thought processes tell me it’s wrong to kick anyone, especially when he’s down, my heart must follow the teachings of the one who said he was a preacher (but he preached “for it,” whatever “it” was). To do otherwise would be blasphemy.

So here goes: It looks as though Superintendent of Education John White may have lied again (insert collective audible gasp from readers).

White, named last December by the Education Clearinghouse web blog as the worst education superintendent in the country http://educationclearinghouse.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/louisianas-john-white-the-worst-superintendent-in-the-country/, announced on April 19 that he was withdrawing student information from a non-profit database run by NewsCorp. Owner Rupert Murdoch and linked to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Or did he?

He made the announcement only days after talking up the arrangement to the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE), which had been unaware of his agreement to “park” student data in the inBloom “garage.”

LouisianaVoice first broke the story last February that White had entered into an agreement with inBloom to provide sensitive personal data on hundreds of thousands of Louisiana school children—with no guarantee from inBloom that the data would not be susceptible to intrusion or hacking.

The inBloom contract with Gates also would have allowed for the unrestricted subcontracting of duties and obligations covered under the agreement.

Murdoch said in 2010, “When it comes to K through 12 education, we see a $500 billion sector in the U.S.” http://www.inthepublicinterest.org/blog/jeb-bushs-education-nonprofit-really-about-corporate-profits?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+itpi-blog+%28ITPI+Commentary+Feed%29.

White met in September 2011 with Peter Gorman, senior vice president of Wireless Generation, the newly-formed education division of NewsCorp. It was in an exchange of emails with Gorman that White told Gorman, “Dude, you are my recharger.”

In a January email to White, Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) executive assistant Vicky Thomas informed White that the department was participating in the data storage agreement with inBloom.

When news of the agreement between DOE and inBloom first became public, many parents protested to DOE about the furnishing of student data to the Murdoch company. NewsCorp had been involved in a major computer hacking scandal in Europe only months before and parents were wary of allowing the release of sensitive data to his company—or anyone else.

When White made the announcement on April 19 that he was rescinding the agreement, inBloom immediately tweeted, “Louisiana still part of inBloom community. Many inaccuracies in coverage.”

LouisianaVoice made a public records request three days later on April 22, for “the official letter or email that you sent to inBloom to cancel the data storage agreement as per the lead paragraph…from the Monroe News Star.”

White, openly flaunting the state’s public records law, ignored the request until LouisianaVoice filed a lawsuit seeking that and other records requested of the department. On Thursday, May 9, only days away from next Monday’s court hearing on LouisianaVoice’s lawsuit, DOE forwarded the last of a flurry of responses to various records requests.

Those responses obviously will be used as a defense that the department did, in fact, respond to all our records requests. Overlooked, apparently, is a provision in state law that says records must be produced immediately, not several months down the road and done so only to head off pending litigation.

Thursday’s response from DOE attorney Troy Humphrey said:

“Our public information office has requested that I inform you that the Department is not in possession of any public record(s) responsive to the above-written request.”

Wait. What?

If you have an agreement with an entity to provide personal data on hundreds of thousands of students, wouldn’t it be fair to assume there would be a contract or at least a memorandum of understanding setting out the terms and conditions of the agreement?

And if there is a contract and/or a memorandum of understanding, wouldn’t it also be fair to assume that if that agreement were cancelled by either party, there would be a letter or at least an email to that effect? A paper trail, as it were?

Is White so naïve that he can enter into and exit from an agreement as momentous as this without some official documentation?

He previously had either neglected or refused to provide copies of a memorandum of understanding with inBloom and now he’s trying to tell us that there is no written record of his withdrawing from the agreement?

Wow. Talk about a leap of faith.

Perhaps Rep. Alan Seabaugh needs to give him a call to jog his memory.

Or better yet, maybe Peter Gorman should check in. He was, after all, White’s “recharger.”

If and when Gov. Bobby Jindal or BESE President Chas Roemer gives White a “vote of confidence,” you’ll know he’s toast.

Read Full Post »

Blind, unquestioning loyalty has long been a prerequisite for serving in the administration of Gov. Bobby Jindal.

Any administrator, of course, expects his appointees to be loyal, and rightfully so. There’s no argument at any level with that basic principle of employment, whether one works for a bicycle shop or the President.

Generally, though, an intelligent CEO will seek candid input from subordinates—even if that input differs from his management philosophy. The free exchange of ideas is, after all, the foundation for growth and progress in any organization.

Except with the Jindal administration.

At least a dozen firings/demotions have documented the belief that if you don’t drink the Jindal Kool-Aid, if you so much as give a flickering thought to dissent, you will be teagued.

Teagued, of course, is the term born of Jindal’s firing of state employees from rank and file workers to state board members to university presidents and cabinet officials and of the demotions of at least four legislators from their committee assignments.

To this point, the firings and demotions have been limited to state employees and legislators.

No longer.

Now there may reason to believe the Jindal retaliation team has reached into the private sector and the perpetrator is none other than Superintendent of Education John White.

The latest victim may be Sue Lincoln, formerly a reporter for Louisiana Public Broadcasting (LPB), and a veteran of 35-years’ reporting experience.

Lincoln, who lives in Baton Rouge, is careful not to say outright that White had her fired, but the evidence is pretty convincing.

The Southern Education Desk, headquartered in Atlanta, GA., is funded by a multi-million dollar grant from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and reports on education news from five states—Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee and Louisiana. While Lincoln worked for LPB as a reporter for the Southern Education Desk, her salary was paid from the grant.

It is, or was, a two-year grant administered through Georgia Public Broadcasting (GPB) and involved eight stations—five National Public Radio and three Public Broadcast System television stations. They included WLPB-TV and WRKF Radio, both Baton Rouge stations.

Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) President Chas Roemer feigned surprise and/or ignorance of reports of manipulations of student test scores by the Department of Education (DOE) during a Senate Education Committee hearing last week but the truth is Lincoln first reported on the department’s suppression of data as early as February 12.

It was that report that most probably ended her reporting tenure with LPB and the Southern Education Desk.

The report cited studies by Mercedes Schneider, Ph.D., a teacher in St. Tammany Parish which called into question dramatic jumps of up to 25 points in high school standardized test scores.

Lincoln noted that Herb Bassett, who holds a master’s degree in mathematics and who teaches in LaSalle Parish, also saw major discrepancies in statistics released by DOE. Bassett is the same one who at last week’s Senate Education Committee accused DOE and White of releasing fraudulent data.

It was that data about which Roemer denied any knowledge but promised he’d “look into it.”

Immediately after we posted Roemer’s denial, Schneider emailed LouisianaVoice to say, “I have a document that proves he (Roemer) is lying.”

She promptly followed that email with a copy of a letter she sent to White and BESE members (including Roemer) on Dec. 1, 2012 in which she called attention to what she said was “scoring bias” in the 2012 school performance scores. (We will elaborate more on the contents to that and other documents in subsequent posts as our coverage of this growing story continues.)

White apparently turned up the heat on Lincoln and her bosses in Atlanta in an effort to kill the story.

He first told Lincoln the story was “too complicated for television” and that “Even the New York Times doesn’t have enough ink and paper to do it justice,” Lincoln said. “He accused me of sucking up to Diane Ravitch.” Ravitch is research professor of education at New York University and a leading opponent of current education reform trends.

“He told me to ‘check with people over you to be sure this is the right thing to do,’” Lincoln said

A series of emails between Lincoln and White is even more revealing.

At 1:28 p.m. on Jan. 23, as White prepared for a weekend in New Orleans with his wife (She has never moved to Louisiana from their New York home, which should say something about White’s long-range plans for remaining in Louisiana), Lincoln emailed him:

“John, thank you for your call and the copy of the letter you sent out. After conferring with my editors here and in Atlanta, they want me to go ahead with the story. Please don’t let it affect your evening with your wife, but I will be coming down to N.O. to interview you at 10 tomorrow morning.

“I’ll give you a statement instead,” White tersely replied six minutes later.

As Lincoln delved further into the questionable data, she sought a comment from White who, instead of addressing the apparent problem, went on the attack.

Two days later, at 8:51 a.m. on Jan. 25, Lincoln emailed White: “Due to an electrical fire at LPB Wednesday night (Jan. 23), we were without video-editing capability for the majority of the day Thursday. As a result, the airing of my story on the 2012 SPS (school performance scores) analysis has been pushed back to Feb. 1.

“Because of this delay, I have to ask again—would you consider going on camera to make a statement?”

Four minutes later, at 8:55 a.m., White, apparently not having read Lincoln’s email asking for an on-camera statement, wrote: “Your source knowingly distorts facts in print, but you are using her as a source on the very issue about which she distorts facts.

“This story is pure innuendo and drama—a fiction—under the guise of investigative reporting.”

Then, 19 minutes later, at 9:14, White, sent another email saying, “Sue, take a look at what your source has written here. First she lies about my experience working in schools. But more than that, she goes out of our (sic) way to assert that my administration created this formula regarding graduation rate bonus points and such.”

Finally, at 9:29 a.m., 38 minutes after Lincoln asked him to appear on camera, White responded: “No thanks. If reported accurately, this is a story of a formula and a calculation by way of that formula. The number and the formula can speak for themselves.”

“I can’t say for certain that the story is the reason I’m no longer reporting for the Southern Education Desk,” Lincoln said. The grant is currently under consideration for renewal but LPB informed Lincoln they were “going in a different direction” should the renewal be approved.

WRKF was not a partner in the initial grant, but has asked to become a partner if there is a third year of funding.

“The Southern Education Desk managing editor at GPB was unfailingly supportive of doing investigative stories,” Lincoln says. “And he was insistent that there needed to be a ‘firewall’ between the financial and political concerns of LPB management and what Southern Education Desk reporters covered.”

So why would LPB crater to White’s demands?

First, there is the factor of Course Choice providers. Described by DOE as “an innovative educational program that provides Louisiana students with access to thousands of high-quality academic and career-oriented courses,” the program simply allows practically any provider to offer online courses to students—on the state’s tab. Not only may just about anyone, private or public sector, offer courses, but they also are free to charge just about whatever they want.

Bottom line: there’s big money for Course Choice providers.

One of the approved providers is Louisiana Public Broadcasting.

Follow the money.

Second, LPB has a contract with the Iberville Parish School Board to provide certain curriculum and instruction to the parish system. Elvis Cavalier is the Iberville curriculum director, or Chief Academic Officer. He also serves as Director of Academies, also known as principal of the little-known Math, Science and Arts (MSA) Academy.

Little is known about the school because it flies under the radar. It does not exist for all practical purposes. It is not listed among Louisiana public schools and its student scores are not reported to DOE or to the federal government.

Known informally as a “shadow school,” scores for its 1200 students are spread out among the other public schools in Iberville Parish. This allows Iberville School Superintendent Ed Cancienne to boast—and he does—that Iberville’s performance score “has grown.” He neglects to add that that growth is primarily the result of infused scores from the “non-existent” MSA Academy.

Lincoln said she began investigating that story and her editors at LPB kept telling her to get additional information. “When I’d get that, they’d want more. It kept on that way until I was finally informed there would be no story,” she said.

Follow the money.

“I can’t prove that I was terminated because of pressure or implied threats from White regarding the Course Choice program or because of the shadow school story,” Lincoln said.

“All I can do is connect the dots.”

Read Full Post »

We’ve been trying to spread the message for some time now about how the administration of Gov. Bobby Jindal is cognizant only of the well-being of Bobby Jindal and his presidential aspirations which, by the way, are evaporating like so much acetone-based nail polish remover.

We’ve sounded the alarm on reforms to public education, budget cuts to higher education, attempted pension reforms, privatization, the firing of state appointed officials and the demotion of legislators, the refusal to accept federal funding for Medicaid, broadband internet, a rail link between Baton Rouge and New Orleans, early childhood intervention and federal stimulus funds (though there seems to be no compunction about all that federal highway money that the state receives, nor hurricane relief when it’s needed).

We’ve written extensively about how the appointments to plum commissions and boards seem to gravitate toward big campaign contributors and how the appointees use their purchased positions to inflict the whims of the governor on state institutions and state employees.

And we were first to sound the alarm, thanks to a timely heads-up State Rep. Jerome “Dee” Richard (I-Thibodaux), that the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) had not approved the Jindal administration’s half-baked state hospital privatization plan—a development which could cost the state another $800 million in Medicaid funds if the state does not submit its plan for approval in time for the adoption of next year’s state budget.

Now, though, it seems that others are beginning to catch on. There are rumblings of discontent in the Legislature, the Board of Regents backed the governor down in his attempt to fire the commissioner of higher education, the state school principals association simply walked away from a state-sponsored Principal of the Year contest over the criteria imposed on the selection process by Education Superintendent John White.

We broke the initial story about White’s decision to provide personal data on all Louisiana public school students to inBloom, a massive computer data bank controlled by Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch. The backlash from that story has forced White to back down on the agreement with inBloom, though we’re still skeptical about the legitimacy of his announcement that he was calling the information back into the Department of Education. It seems to us that it might be a little difficult to take back what was already submitted to inBloom. Kind of like getting the genie back into the bottle.

We are told, by the way, that White and his minions have literally freaked out over our latest request for public records relative to the DOE Value Added Model (VAM) for teacher evaluations. Apparently, there is some information in the records we requested that he desperately does not want the public to know.

And of course, there is that federal investigation looming over the governor’s office regarding that $184 million contract awarded to CNSI by its former employee, Department of Health and Hospitals Secretary Bruce Greenstein. Greenstein was the first domino to fall in that little scandal and there could be more.

But now, state employees, while still maintaining their anonymity for the sake of keeping their jobs, are starting to sound off and they’re doing so loudly and clearly.

The essay below was penned by a state employee. We know the employee’s name but we are sworn to secrecy to protect a state worker who has seen wanton disregard for propriety and ethics up close and personal.

To summarize, the essay is about the surreptitious retaining of Ruth Johnson, retired Department of Children and Family Services Director, to a $49,900 contract from Feb. 18 through June 14 at which time she is expected to be hired full time at a six-figure salary.

Contract Details

Contract Number 720077
Contract Title DOA/OIT & RUTH JOHNSON
Contract Description PROVIDE CONSULTING, RESEARCH, ANALYSIS, AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT TO THE OFFICE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOR ALL MATTER S RELATED TO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND RESOURCES. 100% STATE GENERAL; $80/HOUR PLUS $4,377.60 TRAVEL
Agency DOA-OFFICE OF CIO
Amount $49,900.00
Begin Date 2/18/2013
End Date 6/14/2013
Approval Date 3/14/2013
Document Type CONSULTING CONTRACT-CFMS
Status ENCUMBRANCE SUCCESSFUL
Contractor RUTH JOHNSON
Contractor City and State BATON ROUGE, LA

So why put her on contract instead of hiring her outright?

For that answer, refer back to her contract, which runs through mid-June.

The Legislature, by law, is required to adjourn no later than June 6. When her contract expires, it will be too late for her appointment to full time status to be confirmed by the State Senate.

By going the route of a contract through June 14, DOA avoids the messy confirmation process and as we shall see in the essay below, Sen. Karen Carter Peterson (D-New Orleans) has already seen through the ruse.

Here is the essay by Anonymous:

As I read recent headlines regarding the current administration, I find myself pausing to take a reflective look back. What I see saddens me.

There are so many who have chosen to defile the system with little regard or respect for their colleagues, Louisiana law, and even the Legislature for that matter. Some might even go as far as to say they’ve done so with an incredible degree of arrogance—assuming no one around them will notice. Maybe they assume no one will speak up. Maybe they have, like Jindal, become too callous to care. But I want to take a second to assure you—especially those “insiders” monitoring this blog—that your colleagues do notice.

Last Thursday, on the floor of the State Senate, Sen. Karen Carter Peterson (D-New Orleans) called attention to a particular contract the administration planned to sneak by state employees and the legislature. You know the one that contracts out the Chief Information Officer position to former DCFS Secretary Ruth Johnson?

Yep, that one. It’s the one that seems to us, to be an attempt to circumvent both the legislative process as well as Louisiana law. It’s the same contract that fills what statute says must be an appointed and unclassified position—with a contractor, or vendor, if you will. It is the contract that was written for $49,900 (just $100 below the $50,000 level that requires approval of Contractual Review). And it’s the same one that expires one week after the session ends which would allow Ms. Johnson to avoid a confirmation hearing.

And most importantly, it is the one that allows Ms. Johnson to return to State service as a rehired retiree without having to follow any of the guidelines outlined by LASERS. href=”http://www.lasersonline.org/uploads/21ProceduresWhenHiringReemployedRetirees.pdf).”>http://www.lasersonline.org/uploads/21ProceduresWhenHiringReemployedRetirees.pdf).

Yes, they have been watching.

Do you know what else they’ve seen? How about that new position created for a family member of a current Louisiana Congressman? The $150,000 position that did not exist before now? They noticed. And are you aware they also noticed that the holder of that position, Jan Cassidy, called a state employee prior to her arrival to ensure a state contract won by her employer at the time (ACS/Xerox) was pushed through before she arrived? You didn’t think they would see that either, did you?

I’m sure it seems unbelievable they might not be as naive to the wrong doing as you assumed. Employees aren’t supposed to question things. But they have been. And you should know they’ve been watching much further back than just the past year.

They all noticed that job you filled with a family member of a prominent public servant only a few months after laying off a number of employees from the same area. They all noticed how the spouse of the current Deputy Commissioner was able to gain rights to a classified position, available when and if her unclassified one comes to an end. They saw the ethical violations involved as she discussed matters directly with her spouse and HR Director at the time.

And if it isn’t enough that the Deputy Commissioner is indirectly supervising his spouse, he actually ensured she was placed in the best position she could qualify for at the time. Yes, the gullible, never-figures-out-your-secrets employees noticed. And not surprisingly, it would seem as if a close friend of said spouse noticed as well. How else could someone close to retirement, who supervises no one, snag a $15,000 raise while her colleagues continue to work alongside her with no merit increases or opportunities to move forward.

Yes they have seen the Tim Barfields and the Bruce Greensteins – same people only differing faces. They have passed all of you in the halls, the parking lots, and sometimes at various functions and ponder how you could smile at them and make light of current events. They wonder how you walk these halls and look them in the eyes as if you haven’t plundered them for your own advancements.

And while they may not show it outwardly, they know what you have done for yourselves at the expense of others. They know who signed the papers and who pushed through the favors and you can bet they only wish they could ask you if it’s worth it. Is being on the inside with an inflated sense of entitlement and self-worth so much that you’d sell your integrity to move yourself forward? Is it worth losing any remaining respect your colleagues might have had for you? Is it worth not only stealing from and lying to the public, but also to the people you interact with on a daily basis?

I hope it is. Because in the end, that money and “insider” status is all you’ll have. Someday you’ll realize those are just temporary tokens you can’t take with you when you leave this place or when you yourself become one of this administration’s sacrificial lambs. Surely you can ask Bruce Greenstein about that one. I imagine he’d tell you that politicians will wither and fade, as will your self-imposed status, and you’ll be left with the people you stepped on and stole from to get to where you are. Maybe then, when you don’t think you hold the cards, maybe that will be a better time to ask – was it worth it?

And don’t worry – as always, they will be watching.

Read Full Post »

“Our goal was to find a candidate that understands the traditions and practices of higher learning, but who also is willing to lead our great university through (anticipated) changes.”

—R. Blake Chatelain, chairman of the LSU Presidential Search Committee.

Read Full Post »

Vetting (v.): To subject to thorough examination or evaluation (The Free Online Dictionary).

Did the LSU Board of supervisors make even a token attempt at vetting the applicants for LSU President before settling on F. King Alexander, current president of the University of California Long Beach?

Vetting (v.) The process of performing a background check on someone before offering them employment (Wikipedia).

Did Long Beach State make even a cursory attempt at vetting F. King Alexander before he was chosen president of that university?

Vetting (v.): To make a careful and critical examination (Oxford Dictionary).

Okay, the last definition was in deference to the Oxford Roundtable Foundation, the organization headed by Alexander but not really affiliated with Oxford University.

The LSU Board of Supervisors meets today (Wednesday) to finalize the details of Alexander’s contract.

But back to the original question: was there even a perfunctory effort to vet the leader of Louisiana’s flagship university by the LSU Board of Supervisors?

Besides the fact that Alexander’s own curriculum vitae indicates that the highest level to which he rose as a teacher was a five-year (1997-2001) stint as an assistant professor at the University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana before making the quantum leap to the presidency of Murray State University in Murray, Kentucky, where he served for another five years (2001-2005).

Apparently, it isn’t necessary to pose the vetting question with Murray State; he simply succeeded his father, S. Kern Alexander to the presidency of the school.

Assuming that it’s the norm for an assistant professor to scale the academic ladder to president of a 10,000-student university in a single move (which, of course, it certainly is not), it’s his handling of a major grant from a prominent movie executive http://thugthebook.blogspot.com/ while at Long Beach State that we will examine here. Additional analyses of his qualifications will be provided in subsequent posts which we will offer for simultaneous release to the LSU Reveille and a couple of other choice blogs.

In May of 2007, King signed off on a three-page pledge agreement by movie producer/director Steven Spielberg’s Wunderkinder Foundation in which the foundation pledged nearly $1.4 million to support Long Beach State’s Master’s in Fine Arts in Dramatic Writing Program within the Film and Electronic Arts Department.

The money was given by Wunderkinder in three incremental payments. The first payment, $590,000 was payable upon the effective date of the pledge agreement (May 31, 2007). The second installment of $400,000 was due on the first anniversary of the effective date of the pledge agreement (May 31, 2008) and the final payment of $388,000 was scheduled for May 31, 2009, the second anniversary date of the pledge agreement.

The pledge agreement said, in part:

• The pledged funds are designated to (i) support the Master’s in Fine Arts in Dramatic Writing Program at the (university); (ii) support the conversion of space for a soundstage and editing studio in the (Department), and (iii) support equipment maintenance, replacement, and upgrades within the (Department);

• If (the university foundation) should for any reason lose its tax-exemption so that gifts to it no longer qualify as tax deductible, or if the pledged funds are used for any purpose not specifically permitted under this pledge agreement, this pledge agreement shall terminate immediately and pledgor (Wunderkinder) shall have no further obligation thereafter to pay any amounts not previously funded.

• A breach by (the university foundation) of this pledge agreement may cause irreparable injury to pledgor not readily measurable in money and for which pledgor shall be entitled to seek injunctive relief or to terminate this pledge agreement without further obligation to (the foundation), or both.

All three checks were delivered to the university’s Film and Electronic Arts Department as scheduled.

The third check of $388,000 was issued through Comerica Bank-California on May 18, 2009. But six weeks earlier, on April 6, Alexander had issued a directive suspending future admissions for the program, effectively killing it—even as Spielberg was said to have been preparing to renew the grant for another three years.

The check was not only negotiated in the full knowledge that it would not go for its intended purpose, but some of the money was then moved from the donor foundation account into the Film and Electronic Arts general account to be mingled with state funds and used for salaries.

Because there were still five students finishing the program, each received $10,000 under the grant, leaving $338,000 that went for other purposes—an apparent violation of the terms of the pledge agreement.

When the financial crunch hit colleges and universities across the country, Long Beach State was not spared and university faculty took a 10 percent “furlough” pay cut for the 2009-2010 academic year–ostensibly because of funding cuts. Later that year, however, Alexander announced that additional money had been “found.”

The terms of the furlough that came into existence in the fall of 2009 specifically said, “Faculty Unit employees whose salary is 100 percent funded from grants and contracts not funded from the state general fund shall not be subject to this furlough agreement.”

Yet a faculty member whose salary was to have been funded 100 percent by the Spielberg/Wunderkinder grant saw a 10 percent reduction in his salary. That 10 percent was apparently re-allocated for general expenses rather than for the purposes specified in the pledge agreement which could be interpreted as a breach of the pledge contract.

To make matters worse, Spielberg was never informed of the termination of the Master’s in Fine Arts in Dramatic Writing Program.

Spielberg, meanwhile, was experiencing problems of his own and for whatever reasons, did not pursue the matter. Wunderkinder in 2008 had become a victim of the giant Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Bernard Madoff. With assets of $12.6 million as of November of 2006, Wunderkinder’s financial fortunes had suffered right along with other investors in Madoff’s scheme.

By late 2009, even though Wunderkinder was financially crippled by Madoff, Spielberg continued his personal philanthropic activities on behalf of the University of Southern California, among others .

Vetting.

Read Full Post »

A company that was chosen over 11 other companies for a state contract worth nearly $1 billion may have violated a state law in 2011 when it submitted a sworn affidavit that no other entities owned more than 5 percent of its company.

When Michael Rashid, president and CEO of the AmeriHealth Mercy Family of Companies (AMFC) signed off on a three-year, $926 million contract with the Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH) in September of 2011, he submitted a required disclosure of ownership dated Oct. 7, 2010 and signed by AMFC Senior Vice President of Legal Affairs and General Counsel Robert Gilman.

The contract calls for AmeriHealth Mercy to provide “a broad range of services necessary for the delivery of healthcare services to Medicaid enrollees participating in the Medicaid Coordinated Care Network (CCN) Program.”

Services include developing and maintaining an adequate provider network, access standards, utilization management, quality management, prior authorization, provider monitoring, member and provider services, primary care management, fraud and abuse monitoring and compliance, case management, chronic care management and account management.

The contract includes 24/7 access to a health care professional, service authorization, provider payments, claims management, marketing and member education, according to the contract document.

Such disclosures of ownership are standard with state contracts to ensure that there are no conflicts of interest or ethics violations that would occur if a state employee or immediate family member held an interest in a company contracting with the state.

Gilman signed the notarized disclosure form which identified AmeriHealth Mercy Health Plan of Philadelphia, PA., as the only entity having more than a 5% ownership of AmeriHealth Mercy of Louisiana.

The only problem with that was that AmeriHealth was jointly owned by Mercy Health System and Independence Blue Cross (IBC) with each owning 50 percent of AmeriHealth.

That arrangement had been in existence since 1996 but in August of 2011, two months before Gilman’s affidavit and a month before Rashid signed the contract with the state, IBC purchased an additional 10 percent and Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) of Michigan bought the remaining 40 percent, giving the two Blue Cross entities 100 percent ownership of AmeriHealth.
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/20110809/FREE/110809869/blue-cross-buys-40-stake-in-national-medicaid-company

Bruce Greenstein was appointed Secretary of DHH by Gov. Bobby Jindal in July of 2010 and he was confirmed by the Louisiana Legislature in June of 2011 after a contentious standoff with the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee over Greenstein’s refusal to identify the winner of a $185 million Medicaid contract with DHH. http://www.gov.state.la.us/index.cfm?md=pagebuilder&tmp=home&cpid=27

He finally relented and admitted that the winning contractor was his former employer, CNSI of Gaithersburg, MD. Circumstances of that contract have prompted a federal investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office and Greenstein has announced he will resign in May.

In early August of 2011, barely a month after Greenstein was officially confirmed, IBC and BCBS of Michigan announced that they would partner to expand services to Medicaid beneficiaries nationally through the AmeriHealth Mercy Family of Companies. http://www.ibx.com/company_info/news/press_releases/2011/08_09_IBC_and_BCBS_of_Michigan.html

The joint announcement noted that a 2010 report from the National Association of State Budget Offices indicated that Medicaid represented states’ second largest budget obligation after education, averaging 22 percent of total state spending.

The announcement then gave a hint of what states might expect.

“AmeriHealth Mercy provides Medicaid managed care services directly to Pennsylvania, Indiana and South Carolina and has subcontracts to provide these services in Kentucky and New Jersey,” it said, adding that AmeriHealth Mercy was chosen to provide Medicaid managed care coverage in Louisiana.

While BCBS companies are supposedly separate and independent in each state and though BCBS of Louisiana currently does not participate in a state Medicaid contract (its contract is with the Office of Group Benefits to administer claims of state employees, retirees and dependents), BCBS has been moving in partnership with AmeriHealth Mercy into other states, including Florida.

The AmeriHealth Mercy contract signing coincided with Greenstein’s appointment and his wife’s employment by BCBS of Louisiana but there is nothing to indicate a connection.

Still, the association between two separate Blue Cross companies and the winner of a state contract worth nearly $1 billion coupled with the curious failure of the winning bidder to list both its owners on the disclosure of ownership form could raise a few eyebrows.

Read Full Post »

Like the muddy waters of the Mississippi River that flow right past the Claiborne Building, operations in the Louisiana Department of Education (DOE) just seem to get murkier and murkier and its bureaucracy more and more difficult to navigate.

There is Teach for America (TFA), the cluster of TFA alumni awarded administrative positions in the department and the financial manipulations that go with that program; the controversy over charters and course choice; the ongoing courtroom battles over the funding of vouchers, the questionable appointments of out-of-state commuters, the agreement to feed student personal information into a data bank controlled by Rupert Murdoch, and the ever-daunting challenge of obtaining public records from the department, to name only a few.

Easily the most secretive of any state agency, DOE is supported by a governor who, ironically enough, likes to boast of his administration’s openness and transparency. DOE and Superintendent of Education John White operate with virtual autonomy—mostly because there is no system of checks and balances to ensure that the agency is answerable.

Requests for public records are ignored, The Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE), with the exception of two members, rubber-stamps anything Jindal and White suggest, be it ripping funding away from local school boards to pay for vouchers to approving applications for course choice (online) programs to burdening the department with costly six-figure positions filled by itinerates with little to no classroom experience.

White recently received his annual performance evaluation from BESE and predictably received high marks from nine of the board’s 11 members. The truth of the matter, however, is that White is woefully ill-qualified to lead even a local school system, much less a statewide system of 700,000 public school students.

Unfortunately, his six-weekend course (spread out over 10 months) at the Eli Broad Superintendents Academy does not qualify him to lead a Cub Scout troop. Yet, Gov. Bobby Jindal considered him more qualified than any other candidate to preside over the demolition of public education in Louisiana.

The Eli Broad Academy, by the way, has come under criticism for turning out superintendents who use corporate-management techniques to consolidate power, weaken teachers’ job protections, cut parents out of the decision-making process and introduce unproven reform measures.

The latest audit of the Recovery School District is evidence enough of White’s inability to run a statewide system.

The audit, released on March 27, revealed that for the sixth consecutive year, RSD continued to experience problems keeping track of millions of dollars in movable property.

Why does that reflect on White when Patrick Dobard is the RSD superintendent?

Well, for openers, the latest audit is for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012 and White did not become state superintendent until January of 2012.

Prior to that, he was superintendent of the Recovery School District.

The audit says, “For the sixth consecutive year, RSD did not ensure that movable property was safeguarded against loss, including loss arising from unauthorized use and misappropriation. Our review of RSD’s movable property activity disclosed the following:”

• RSD’s annual certification of property inventory, which the Louisiana Property Assistance Agency did not approve, disclosed $26,664,976 in total movable property, which included 1,633 items with a total acquisition cost of $2,738,016 that have been identified as unlocated during the past four-year period. Of the 1,633 unlocated items, 1,380 items were computers or computer-related equipment. The 2012 annual certification also identified 908 items with a total acquisition cost of $1,482,060 (54 percent) as unlocated for the current period.

• RSD reported 10 incidents at six separate schools involving 97 movable property items with an acquisition cost of $73,667 as missing/stolen to the legislative auditor and the local district attorney. Of the 97 movable property items, 70 were computers. Management has represented that seven items with an acquisition cost of $6,118 have been recovered.

• The 10 reported incidents involved computers being stolen from four RSD direct-run schools and one charter school. There was no sign of forced entry in three instances that resulted in a loss of 48 items with an acquisition cost of $20,064. In one instance, 26 Dell laptop computers and 20 Apple I-Pod Nano media devices with an acquisition cost of $17,031 were stolen from an RSD direct-run school’s storage room.

• RSD’s movable property function is hampered by the decentralization of movable property at the various custodians (schools) and a lack of accountability and training of the custodians for RSD property. Failure to safeguard movable property increases the risk that assets may be misreported, lost or stolen. In addition, the year-to-year cost of replacing lost or stolen movable items could reduce the availability of funds (federal or state) for other educational objectives.

• During FY 2012, RSD did not ensure that employee separation dates were accurate or timely. Not recording separation dates accurately and timely could result in overpayments for terminated employees. This is the sixth consecutive year that we have cited RSD for inadequate controls over its payroll process.

White apparently is far more focused on insulating himself with fellow Teach for America (TFA) and Eli Broad Academy alumni by appointing them to top administrative positions.

Take Chief of Staff Kunjan Narechania and Deputy Superintendent Michael Rounds, for instance.

Rounds, like White, is a 2010 alumnus of Eli Broad and was brought in by White as Deputy Superintendent at $170,000 per year.

Rounds resigned his position as Chief Operating Officer for Kansas City Public Schools a year ago following an investigation into bid irregularities involving a $32 million renovation project for Kansas City schools and a month later the contract was cancelled by Kansas City Public Schools Superintendent Stephen Green (can you say Bruce Greenstein and CNSI?).

And then there is Narechania, a TFA alumnus who, while officially serving as White’s chief of staff, in reality performed functions normally handled only by a deputy or assistant superintendent.

Narechania oversaw all expenditures in the department; no one purchased anything—not a computer, not even a ball point pen without first obtaining authority from Narechania. All assistant superintendents and directors were required to report to her. No one was hired by the department without her stamp of approval—even when no one was quite sure what the new hire would actually be doing. That was evidenced only days before David Lefkowith was hired last June when she emailed White that there needed to be a decision about what to do about Lefkowith. As late as September and December of 2012, she was still signing off on contract amendments, a duty that did not fall within the job description of a chief of staff.

On Sept. 21, she signed off on an amendment to the department’s 15-year, $65.6 million contract with Data Recognition Corp. for administration of the statewide iLEAP testing program. The amendment added three additional years (to June 30, 2015) and $20.96 million to the existing contract.

Beneath her signature was the crossed through printed title “Assistant Superintendent.”

The other contract amendment had the proper title of Chief of Staff beneath her signature that approved a $3.5 million amendment to a $17.5 million contract with Pacific Metrics Corp. for the replenishing of materials for science, social studies and math.

So why didn’t White simply have Narechania confirmed as deputy or assistant superintendent?

One source within the department said it was because when White appeared before the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee for approval of the appointments of several other administrators last June, he knew he could not obtain Narechania’s confirmation because she was already acting as his number two, sighing all personnel paperwork, contracts, etc., on his behalf.

It would have been awkward to explain that to the committee.

That could be the reason he asked BESE to petition the legislature to approve a reorganization of DOE and has proceeded with that reorganization—without either BESE or legislative approval.

The problem, however, is that he has been operating outside the law for more than a year now by allowing her to sign off on personnel matters and on DOE contracts.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,821 other followers