In July 2013, the education world was rocked when a breaking story by Chicago independent journalist Sarah Karp reportedthat district CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett had pushed through a no-bid $20 million contract to provide professional development to administrators with a private, for-profit company called SUPES Academy, which she had worked for a year before the deal transpired. Byrd-Bennett was also listed as a senior associate for PROACT Search, a superintendent search firm run by the same individuals who led SUPES.
By 2015, federal investigators looked into the deal and found reason to charge Byrd-Bennett for accepting bribes and kickbacks from the company that ran SUPES and PROACT. A year-and-a-half later, the story made national headlines when Byrd-Bennett was convicted and sentenced to prison for those charges. But anyone who thought this story was an anomaly would be mistaken. Similar conflicts of interest among private superintendent search firms, their associated consulting companies, and their handpicked school leaders have plagued multiple school districts across the country.
In an extensive examination, Our Schools has discovered an intricate web of businesses that reap lucrative school contracts funded by public tax dollars. These businesses are often able to place their handpicked candidates in school leadership positions who then help make the purchasing decision for the same businesses’ other products and services, which often include professional development, strategic planning, computer-based services, or data analytics. The deals are often brokered in secrecy or presented to local school boards in ways that make insider schemes appear legitimate.
As in the Byrd-Bennett scandal, school officials who get caught in this web risk public humiliation, criminal investigation, and potential jail time, while the businesses that perpetuate this hidden arrangement continue to flourish and grow.
The results of these scandals are often disastrous. School policies and personnel are steered toward products that reward private companies rather than toward research-proven methods for supporting student learning and teacher performance. School governance becomes geared to the interests of well-connected individuals rather than the desires of teachers and voters. And when insider schemes become public, whole communities are thrown into chaos, sometimes for years, resulting in wasted education dollars and increased disillusionment with school systems and local governance.
While media accounts generally frame these scandals as examples of corrupt school leaders who got caught and brought to justice, reporters rarely delve into the corporate-operated enterprises that undergird the whole system.
A potent business model
Months before Byrd-Bennett’s conviction, another individual connected to the Chicago scandal, SUPES co-owner Gary Solomon, pleaded guilty to wire fraud charges related to a scheme that diverted over $5 million in public money from the Chicago contracts into his private pocket.
Solomon, who had been forced out of a previous job as a high school administrator after he was accused of racist comments and “preying” on female students, cofounded SUPES — along with sister companies PROACT Search and Synesi Associates — with his former student Thomas Vranas, who also pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the Chicago deals.
Although Solomon and Vranas got caught and were convicted for their scheme, they nevertheless stumbled on a potent business model that combined PROACT’s superintendent search services with SUPES Academy professional development programs and consulting by Synesi Associates to help districts "implement reform strategies." Combining leader recruitment with leadership training and consulting gave Solomon and Vranas three ways into a business relationship with a school district and multiple ways to upsell clients into more expensive new contracts.
New administrators PROACT helped place in leadership roles could be reliable allies for pitching professional development services to the district. School districts that had employed SUPES might be more inclined to hire PROACT for a leadership search. And Synesi would have an inside track for its consulting services. Further, any of the firm’s school leader contacts who became idle between full-time jobs, which often happens in this profession, would be able to work for the firm as “associates.”
School districts may have welcomed this arrangement as a form of “one-stop shopping” for their needs, but it’s not hard to see how it could lead to conflicts of interest and a veil for fraud.
Chicago was not the only district that fell for the pitch. Shortly after news of the Byrd-Bennett scandal broke, school districts in DeKalb County, Illinois; Fayette County (Lexington), Kentucky; and Lancaster, Pennsylvania ended their contracts with PROACT.
In Iowa City, Iowa, a local reporter foundthe district had a contract with Synesi Associates to conduct an audit of the district and then hired PROACT to recruit candidates for a vacant director position. At the same time, superintendent Stephen Murley took 34 days off work to do paid consulting for those two organizations and for SUPES Academy.
In St. Louis, superintendent Kelvin Adams started consulting for SUPES shortly after the school board awarded a $125,000 contract to the firm, Sarah Karp and Melissa Sanchez reported. The district also awarded a $16,500 no-bid deal to Synesi.
But Solomon and Vranas did not invent this money-making strategy, nor did it die when they were convicted and sent to jail.
From retail store to mega-mall
In June 2016, the Chicago Sun Times reported that in the wake of the Byrd-Bennett scandal, parts of SUPES Academy were purchased by Joseph Wise and his partner David Sundstrom. Their Chicago-based firm Atlantic Research Partners (ARP) had already gotten at least $5 million in recent business from Chicago schools. (Sundstrom would later contend ARP rescinded the agreement to acquire SUPES and that the “only remaining connection between the companies” was a licensing of training material.)
Wise founded ARP with Sundstrom in 2007 after both had been ousted from their jobs in the Duval County, Florida, school district due to alleged “serious misconduct.” According to the ARP website, the project’s mission was to launch a “teacher-training program focused on instructional coaching and school capacity-building.”
Around the same time ARP was acquiring parts of SUPES, the company also merged with Jim Huge and Associates, a firm with deep experience in school superintendent and other talent searches. Huge had also servedas chief strategy officer for PROACT Search. The announced rationale of the merger was “to maximize seamless delivery of the intensive executive services to schools and school leaders.”
Undoubtedly, what Wise and Sundstrom assembled was similar to the three-part business model Solomon and Vranas put together. What was different, though, was Wise and Sundstrom would expandon the model with their subsequent acquisition of Education Research and Development Institute (ERDI).
But an entity called ERDI had been in existence since at least 2005 when an article in Education Week described the company as an intermediary organization bringing together school administrators and education vendors to help companies improve the products and services they offer school systems. Specifically, ERDI arranged get-togethers by paying superintendents consulting fees plus expenses to travel to conferences at luxury resorts where they would meet with company representatives. The companies, in turn, underwrote the conferences with substantial fees paid to ERDI.
Critics of ERDI arguethat the company’s model for paying school administrators for their advice on education products inevitably leads to conflict of interest issues when those administrators are presented with offers to purchase products promoted by ERDI.
Byrd-Bennett had a relationship with ERDI dating back to at least 2014 and was listed as senior advisor on the firm’s website while she was employed as Chicago schools’ CEO.
With the acquisition of ERDI, Wise and Sundstrom could transform their business model from a lone retail operation to a mega-mall of education vendors of all kinds.
"The search was manipulated"
One of the first school districts to become entangled in the conglomeration of firms Wise and Sundstrom assembled was Nashville, which in 2016 choseJim Huge and Associates to help with hiring a new superintendent. The following year the board hiredShawn Joseph, whom Huge had recommended.
Shortly after Joseph arrived in Nashville, according to local News Channel 5 investigative reporter Phil Williams, he began pushing the district to give $1.8 million in no-bid contracts to Performance Matters, a Utah-based technology company that sells “software solutions” to school districts.
Williams found Joseph had spoken at the company’s conference and he had touted the company’s software products in promotional materials while he was employed in his previous job in Maryland. Williams also unearthed emails showing Joseph began contract talks with Performance Matters two weeks before he formally took office in Nashville. What also struck Williams as odd was that despite the considerable cost of the contract, district employees were not required to use the software.
In addition to pushing Performance Matters, Williams reported, Joseph gave an “inside track” to Discovery Education, a textbook and digital curriculum provider and another company he and his team had ties to from their work in Maryland. With Joseph’s backing, Discovery Education received an $11.4 million contract to provide a new science, technology, engineering, art, and math (STEAM) program even though a smaller company came in with a bidthat was a fraction of what Discovery proposed.
By June 2018, Nashville school board member Amy Frogge was questioning Joseph about possible connections these vendors might have to ERDI. A district audit would confirm that ERDI’s affiliated companies — including Performance Matters, Discovery Education, and six other companies — had signed contracts totaling more than $17 million with the district since Joseph had been hired.
Frogge also came to realize that all these enterprises were connected to the firm who had been instrumental in hiring Joseph — Jim Huge and Associates.
“The search that brought Shawn Joseph to Nashville was clearly manipulated,” Frogge told Our Schools in an email, “and the school board was kept in the dark about Joseph’s previous tenure in Maryland and his relationships with vendor companies.”
Frogge said some of the manipulation occurred when the search firm told school board members that disputes among current board members — over charter schools, school finances, and other issues — indicated the district was “‘too dysfunctional’ to hire top-level superintendents and therefore needed to hire a less experienced candidate.”
But previous investigations of school leadership search firms conducted by Our Schools have found companies like these frequently forego background checks of prospective candidates they recommend, promote favored candidates regardless of their experience or track record, and push board members to keep the entire search process, including the final candidates, confidential from public scrutiny.
“Too often, national search firms are also driven by money-making motives and/or connections with those seeking profit,” Frogge contended. That conflict of interest is a concern not only in Nashville but also in other districts where school leaders with deep ties to education vendors and consultants have resulted in huge scandals that traumatized communities and cost taxpayers millions.
In the Youngstown City School District in Ohio, CEO Krish Mohip became mired in questions about his role as a paid consultant for ERDI while the district had a $261,914 contract with a partner company of ERDI. Under calls for his resignation, Mohip leftbefore his contract was up.
Beaufort County School District in South Carolina became the subjectof an FBI investigation because of contracts with ERDI and 30 other companies connected to the firm while superintendent Jeff Moss worked as a paid consultant for ERDI. He resigned from the district two years before his contract was up.
In Pittsburgh, superintendent Anthony Hamlet drew scrutiny when reporters found the district spent more than $14 million on dozens of no-bid contracts to firms connected to ERDI at the same time Hamlet was serving as a paid consultant with the company.
In Baltimore County, Maryland, Shaun Dallas Dance made national headlines when he was convicted of perjury committed during his time as superintendent of the district. Dance had concealed $4,600 he’d been paid by ERDI. After Dance participated in confidential meetings with vendors at an ERDI conference, the district extended contracts from companies connected to the firm.
Obviously, school board members could avoid these conflicts by avoiding leadership search firms and consultants connected to ERDI. But that is easier said than done.
After Baltimore County’s troubles with Dance, the school board “did not have sufficient time to do a national search for a permanent replacement,” according to the Baltimore Sun, and hiredVerletta White as interim superintendent in July 2017. The board’s ethics review panel would later find she had failed to “disclose consulting fees” and had “violated an ethics policy” by accepting compensation from ERDI, the Baltimore Sun reported in 2018. The district conducted a new search that in February 2019 involvedindependent firm Ray and Associates. It was unclear, according to the Baltimore Sun, if interim superintendent Verletta White was among the six finalists whom the board chose to interview after Ray and Associates narrowed the finalists down to nine. Although the search was conducted in secrecy, Ray and Associates president Ryan Ray said in a phone call that his firm “did not place” White as superintendent and has “no connection to White and her [numerous] ethical violations.” Ultimately, the job was given not to White but rather to Darryl Williams, and the Baltimore Sun reported that White would be demoted but kept on as a paid consultant to Superintendent Williams, earning a salary of $232,700, per a contract she negotiated when she became interim superintendent.
Indeed, superintendent search firms frequently fail to find conflicts of interest and other problems in the candidate background checks they conduct. And some of these firms operate side businesses that also lead to conflict of interest issues.
A revolving door of business deals funded by taxpayers
One of the largest superintendent search firms in the United States, Schaumburg, Illinois-based Hazard, Young, and Attea (HYA), is part of the ECRA Group, a consulting firm providing an array of services to schools.
ECRA claims to have worked with over 1,000 districts, but a close examination of how the company worked with a number of school districts in Illinois reveals how the firm uses a revolving-door business model in which its search service rotates administrators into and out of leadership positions while the company uses those leadership connections to successfully upsell districts into expensive long-term consulting contracts funded by taxpayers.
ECRA’s business relationships with Oak Park Elementary District 97 in Illinois go back to at least 2010 when it was hiredto help replace outgoing superintendent Constance Collins. With HYA’s help, the district hired Albert Roberts. In 2013, during Roberts’ tenure, school board minutes show the district considered a plan to hire ECRA to analyze the district’s achievement data at a cost of $74,000 a year. The following year, the district hired ECRA to produce an analysis of the achievement gap between white and nonwhite students in the district. Board minutes from 2015 show the district continuing to work with ECRA.
When Roberts retired, District 97 used HYA again for a superintendent search that resulted in hiringCarol Kelley. Kelley currently appears in ECRA’s marketing literature toutingthe firm’s Strategic Dashboard, which District 97 apparently employs.
Former superintendent Collins was hiredto lead Round Lake District 116, also in Illinois, just before HYA and ECRA acquired the district’s superintendent search and strategic planning contracts. Under her tenure, Round Lake paid ECRA $75,918 for consulting services in 2016, 2017, and 2018. Collins retiredfrom Round Lake in 2018, but, according to her LinkedInpage, she became an HYA associate in 2017. She also serves on the advisory board of ECRA, according to her bioat a nonprofit for developing school leaders.
Another Illinois district, Niles Township High School District 219, placedits superintendent on administrative leave after it became known she was the daughter of the president of ECRA, which had a contract with the district worth $149,419 and $120,389 in the final two years of her tenure. (She claimedthat relationship with ECRA dated to before she was made superintendent, but she decided to resign anyway.)
Huntley Community School District 158, also in Illinois, had contractual arrangements with ECRA dating to at least 2009 when John Burkey was superintendent. When Burkey resigned in 2017, District 158 hired HYA to find a new superintendent at a cost of $17,500. At the end of a hiring process in which HYA kept all finalists confidential, District 158 announced it had hired Scott Rowe. Under his leadership, District 158 spent $94,980.11 on ECRA in 2018 alone.
One more example in Illinois: Evanston/Skokie School District 65 has hired ECRA for a variety of consulting services since at least 2010 when it paid the firm $22,737.50, according to state records, to survey the district’s administrators. By 2013, Evanston/Skokie considered ECRA a “long-standing… partner” and hired the firm to help pick its new superintendent. Outgoing superintendent Hardy Murphy also recommendedthe district hire the firm for teacher appraisal work.
Based on HYA’s recommendations, Evanston/Skokie hired Paul Goren in 2014, and under his tenure, checks continued to flow to ECRA’s consulting business, including $129,855.92 in 2015. However, Goren’s tenure was troubled and brief, and in 2019 he resignedwith a $100,000 severance package. A local reporter noticedthat unmentioned in the district’s settlement statement was that under his leadership “the district’s own progress reports [showed] declines in test scores across all groups of students and district losing ground against its own five-year targets.”
Who’s to blame?
When controversies arise over superintendents and contracts with outside services, private firms that are responsible for pushing these hiring and outsourcing decisions are quick to blameschool board members who signed off on the decisions. And critics of public schools frequently use these scandals to argue that democratically elected school boards are dysfunctional and need to be scrapped for other governance structures.
These criticisms leave a lot of context out.
First, being a school board member is customarily a part-time job paying very little money. And school board members are elected to serve as representatives of parents and voters, not to be experts on school finance and administration.
“School board members, although often well intentioned, are sometimes too unqualified and uninformed to exercise effective oversight of spending, and board members are not aware of the personal relationships and personal interests that may be driving decisions by administrative leaders,” Nashville board member Frogge explained.
Also, there are multiple ways superintendents can keep board members in the dark about the inner workings of contractor relationships and district operations.
“From the beginning, Joseph surrounded himself with those who promoted him, including organizations he hired to ‘train’ the board,” Frogge explained. “Joseph also prohibited all district employees from speaking to school board members, which prevented board members from recognizing leadership problems during the early days of his tenure. When board members finally began to confront Joseph about problems, including disturbing financial irregularities and his failure to follow board policy, Joseph lied to board members, exacted retribution from those questioning him, and stirred up controversy to distract from the issues at hand.”
That said, Frogge noted school boards have alternatives to using private search firms that promote tainted candidates willing to feed the search firms’ side businesses.
“School board members need to become better informed and more savvy about profit motives and organizations that seek to influence their selection,” she wrote. “School boards can instead opt to hire a local school boards association (for example, the Tennessee School Boards Association) or a local recruiter with a reputation for personal integrity to conduct a search. They can also choose to hire from within.”
How school boards decide to avoid conflicts of interest with school leaders and outside consulting firms is “critical” according to Frogge because decisions that are driven by these insiders “can lead to catastrophic outcomes for students and staff.”
Among those negative outcomes are increased community acrimony, wasted education funds, and career debacles for what could perhaps have been promising school leaders.
In the case of Joseph and Nashville, controversies with his leadership decisions strongly divided the city’s black community, and taxpayers were stuck with a $261,250 bill for buying out the rest of his contract. As a result of the fallout, Joseph’s state teaching license is endangered, and he vowednever to work in the state again.
To learn more about school privatization, check out Who Controls Our Schools? The Privatization of American Public Education, a free ebook published by the Independent Media Institute.