A K12 timeline and remaining questions: What I think I know — and what I don’t.

I’m still in fact-finding mode on the K12 issue. And I’ve still got timelines on the brain.

So here is an update on what I think I know about the relationship between K12 and the District — and what I don’t know. I’ve organized it chronologically, which I find very helpful. I will continue to update is more information becomes available.

February 2014

K12 creates Fuel Education as a wholly-owned subsidiary. Education Week has a good background story on the some the K12 struggles that helped lead to this move. See link here.

Excerpt here:

As education companies fight for space in the digital learning market, one of the biggest and most controversial players in the school industry is betting that a simple strategy—changing the name of a line of products and services—will give it an edge….

…The Herndon, Va.-based company is probably best known as an operator of online schools. It manages schools and offers blended learning programs in more than 30 states and enrolls about 125,000 students. But it also sells numerous other online and blended learning curricular products and instructional services, and the company says the rebranding is bringing together a number of related offerings—collectively accounting for less than 10 percent of its business—under the new name.

Fuel Education will operate as a separate legal entity owned by K12, and house several different “personalized learning” platforms, as well as teacher professional development, consulting, and Web-based courses.

And here:

K12, which reported revenues of $848 million in fiscal 2013, has long been a focal point in the debate over the role of for-profit companies in education, particularly as it relates to the management of schools.

The company and its backers argue that it fills an important, often unmet need by providing flexible and customized online services to students who struggle or otherwise aren’t comfortable in brick-and-mortar schools.

K12’s detractors point to its students’ lackluster showing on state tests, and to complaints about its business practicesas reasons to be skeptical of its role.

The company has weathered a wave of bad publicity recently. Last year it settled a federal lawsuit by investors who had claimed they were misled by the company about its students’ academic performance and its business practices, though K12 denied the allegations put forward. In September, a prominent hedge fund investor, Whitney R. Tilson, offered a broad critique of K12, in which he said its stock was overvalued.

And in October, company officials reported disappointing enrollment and financial numbers, soon followed by a big drop in K12’s stock price, and it has remained relatively stable since then.

May 16, 2017

The Polk School Board, including me, unanimously approves an apparently unremarkable renewal of a contract with K12, an online education provider. We have used K12 for some time to fulfill state requirements for local online education options.

The amount of the contract renewal we approve with K12 is $594,000.

As I understand it, this isn’t paid in an upfront chunk; it’s paid as kids enroll. It’s the projected cost of serving 100 full-time students and 1,000 part-time. But I’m not completely certain of that.

It’s on the regular agenda. I don’t remember any discussion. The vote seems to have been routine.

May 26, 2017

Ten days after the Board votes to approve that contract, Marc Hutek, assistant superintendent of career, technical, adult and multiple pathways, signs a $1.8 million “Sales Quote” with Fuel Education, which K12 owns. This quote, if followed through on, would commit the Polk District to a pretty massive expansion of the relationship with K12. Although K12 owns Fuel Education, I can’t quite figure out where K12 ends and Fuel Education begins as a service provider.

Hutek says that his boss at the time, Deputy Superintendent John Small, directed him to sign the Sales Quote. Hutek said this in writing about a year later, on June 12, 2018, via email in response to questions I had asked about his role with the K12 sales quote. Here is the part of the June 12, 2018, email specific to signing the Sales Quote. Hutek answer in bold.

Q: Who authorized/directed Marc Hutek to sign the Sales Quote on 5/26/2017? Or did he sign it completely on his own initiative?

“John Small directed me to sign the quote and stated since it was not superintendent/Board approved, it was not considered a contract only a quote.”

Under the terms of the Sales Quote, we would purchase 550 blocks of 10 “enrolled users” — 5,500 enrolled users.  The contract the board just approved projected 100 full-time and 1,000 part-time users.

The new Sales Quote envisions a service period starting July 1, 2017 and running for a year. So that’s $1.8 million just for the year, more than triple what we were already paying K12/fueleducation for services for the year.

The “quote” is good for 30 days, according to the sheet. But that seems irrelevant, because Hutek signed this document underneath the heading: “Accepted by Customer.” Whatever he accepted would seem to be in place. You can click to enlarge.

In her statement about this issued on June 7, Superintendent Jackie Byrd wrote:

A possible source of the confusion regarding this issue is a “Sales Quote”, valid for 30 days, of $1.8 million for 550 blocks of 10 enrolled users that Marc Hutek signed on May 26, 2017.  A copy of that quote is attached with this letter.  In all honesty, I do not know just what Mr. Hutek understood this document to involve since he clearly lacked the authority to bind the School Board.  In any event, it was never acted upon and nothing went before the School Board based upon this “Sales Quote”.

Dr. Hutek brought this to my attention several months after he signed it; I immediately asked that the matter be reviewed.  As the result of my request, a meeting was held last fall with representatives of K-12, including Don Kidd, Vice President, John Small, Dr. Hutek and myself.  Attached to this letter is Dr. Hutek’s memorandum confirming this meeting and the action taken.

My response to that is:

“Please go ask Marc Hutek what he understood this document to involve — and why he signed it. He works for you. He should answer you. Moreover, please ask him if anyone directed him to sign this sales quote. If so, who?” 

Also, the Fall meeting Byrd refers to above apparently occurred in either late October or early November. Hutek confirmed to me via that John Small represented K12 in that meeting.

July 20, 2017

Citing concerns raised by the early days of the Tenoroc investigation and other examples, I write an essay titled: Power, Sex, and Relationships: an urgent policy need.

In that essay, I formally request a disclosure policy concerning sexual or romantic relationships between supervisors and people they supervise.

September 29, 2017 [on or about]

Deputy Superintendent John Small retires. He will very quickly go to work for K12.

Hutek is named “acting” Deputy Superintendent, replacing Small on an interim basis. He will unsuccessfully seek the permanent Deputy Superintendent job.

October 10, 2017

The School Board has its first discussion of the newly public Tenoroc High School investigation. I ask a number of tough questions of staff and board members.

Later in that same meeting, the four long-term School Board members reject the recommendation of a volunteer RFQ committee for Financial Advisor services. They vote 4-3 to keep long-term advisor Ford and Associates, citing the relationship they have with him. I voted to follow the RFQ recommendation and lost.

October 12, 2017

I write about the Board’s surreal financial advisor decision in the article in this link. You can also see the video there.

Key excerpt from my article:

If we had simply switched to PFM quietly, that would have been hinky and uncool. But that’s not what we did. We created an RFQ. We recruited a committee of finance experts who do not work for the Polk School District. And we asked them to rank the two firms based on qualifications.

The committee included finance officials from the cities of Lakeland, Bartow, and Winter Haven. The taxpayers of Lakeland, Winter Haven, and Bartow lent us their time in good faith — because the taxpayers of Bartow, Lakeland, and Winter Haven have an interest in ensuring that your school district leadership supports our teachers and staff with effective financial policies.

The scoring was clear. The committee believed PFM had more resources and better capability to do the work. This seemed like a no-brainer to me, despite my supposed lack of major board experience. But it wasn’t.

I also wrote this.

If relationship matters more than performance, initiative, and capability, how does any new provider of anything crack the $1.4 billion taxpayer budget we oversee? How do we better broaden our base of business to minority-owned firms? How do verify that we’re getting the most value from our vendors. How do we innovate?

Let’s be clear again: I’m tough on staff from time to time. But they did their jobs here, in every way that I can see. This is entirely the doing of the long-term incumbent “experienced” elected board members. They made the call, overruling everybody and wasting everybody’s time and taxpayer money. That’s why we need to replace the three that are up for re-election in 2018.

Fall 2017

According to Jackie Byrd’s statement, Hutek becomes concerned at some point in the fall about the sales quote he signed. He brings those concerns to her. It’s not clear what those concerns were or if any specific issue what prompted Hutek to go to Byrd. Byrd orders some sort of review.

Late October/Early November 2017

In the wake for Hutek’s concerns District officials and K12 officials have meeting about the “Sales Quote.” John Small and Don Kidd represent K12. Hutek and Byrd represent the district.

The District made reference to this meeting in documentation it provided on June 7; but it did not date the meeting precisely. It simply said it occurred in the Fall of 2017.

So I emailed Hutek, Byrd, Small, and School Board Attorney Wes Bridges that night (June 7). I asked them for a precise date for the meeting. And I asked who John Small worked for at the time of the meeting.

Hutek answered on June 9. No one else ever did.

I was unable to identify the exact date for the meeting that occurred.  I have narrowed the timeline to sometime between the last week of October to the first 2 weeks of November of 2017.  Also, I am not aware of when John Small went to work for K12.

Hutek later confirmed that Small represented K12 in the meeting. Small’s Linked-In page says he’s been a K12 VP since October. And he retired from the District at the end of September. So the only logical assumption here is that he was representing K12 in the meeting while on the K12 payroll.

I don’t know what was said in the meeting. But I would like to know.

To be clear, I have no particular problem, on its face, with John Small taking part in meetings with staff while representing a vendor he works for. I have a problem with the School Board not being made aware of it promptly. But perhaps we do need a policy governing how quickly former employees can turn around and make money off the District — sort of like a lobbying policy.

To recap, here is what Byrd said about the meeting in her June 7 statement:

“Dr. Hutek brought this to my attention several months after he signed it; I immediately asked that the matter be reviewed.  As the result of my request, a meeting was held last fall with representatives of K-12, including Don Kidd, Vice President, John Small, Dr. Hutek and myself.  Attached to this letter is Dr. Hutek’s memorandum confirming this meeting and the action taken.”

Several months later, in an email to Don Kidd, K12’s VP of Strategic Sales, sent on March 12, 2018, Hutek wrote:

“As you recall, our superintendent, you, John Small, and me met last fall regarding the concerns involved with this purchase. We were all very clear that there is not a valid board/superintendent approved specifically for the purchase you are referring to.”

This meeting seems crucial to understanding what’s happened here — as does whatever prompted Hutek to go to Byrd about the K12 Sales Quote, “several months after he signed it.”

January 2018

This Polk Virtual School Portal, “powered by FuelEd,” comes online in January, according to statements by Hutek in response to questions I asked via email.

The student self-enrollment portal is up and running and yes we are using it.  Course enrollments are still low due to it coming online following the beginning of second semester and not having NCAA approval for the courses….

…It came online in January and has been in use.  Students may use it even during the summer.  Other than FLVS, we do not have another portal…

…K12 stated they would be writing a press release regarding the portal approximately one month following its release this past January.   After approximately two months and multiple conversations regarding me providing a statement, I reluctantly complied with their request.

I do not know how this portal came into existence. I don’t know if the School District paid for it. I don’t know if I voted for it. I don’t know if this portal provides access to classes other than K12/Fuel Education classes. I know basically nothing about the portal.

I do know that K12/Fuel Education marketing material says that the Polk District asked for it.

“Recently, Polk County Public Schools asked FuelEd to help them create a custom enrollment portal to make it easier for students to use these courses to fulfill their state requirements rather than turn to outside providers.”

Oddly enough, I have struggled mightily to understand how anyone can access the portal for classes. The Polk Virtual School website looks like this.

January 9, 2018

In light of the Acceleration Academy debacle and settlement, I request a disclosure policy for personal relationships related to School Board business or contracts. Here is the account in the meeting minutes:

[Townsend] voiced concern in cases of conflicts of interest. Referencing the Acceleration Academy contract implemented by former Superintendent Kathryn Leroy. He suggested that with any contract or agenda item, if there is a personal relationship with staff or board member, it should be disclosed. He stated he discloses his family relationship with Lake Wales attorney Robin Gibson every time an issue arises with the Lake Wales Charter system.

January 2018

Hutek and K12 begin discussions about district co-operation in a press release/testimonial for K12 about the portal.

K12 stated they would be writing a press release regarding the portal approximately one month following its release this past January.  After approximately two months and multiple conversations regarding me providing a statement, I reluctantly complied with their request.

It is not clear who is representing K12 in this discussion.

March 12, 2018

Hutek replies to an email from Don Kidd, K12’s VP of Strategic Sales about a “payment schedule.” Here is the full text of what Hutek writes:

I received your voice mail and have since reviewed your email regarding the “payment schedule.” As you recall, our superintendent, you, John Small, and me met last fall regarding the concerns involved with this purchase. We were all very clear that there is not a valid board/superintendent approved specifically for the purchase you are referring to. The K12 contract that went to the board provided the costs involved with your products but did not commit to a specific number of seats to be purchased. At that meeting the school district was very clear that we would pay for all license seats used. To the best of my knowledge we have made the appropriate payments for the seats used and that have been billed. It is not our intention to pay for seats until our students use them.

As always, I appreciate your assistance, have a great day. Marc. 

The District has not yet made public the “payment schedule” email that Hutek had reviewed and responded to, so I don’t know what it says.

—————————————————

Moreover, here is an organizational/stakeholder management point.

Let’s assume everything here is on the up-and-up for a second.

If I were Jackie Byrd, the moment staff and K12 met in the fall to discuss the invalid signed sales quote, I would have come immediately to every board member and explained it.

Maybe you get five minutes of tough questions and board unhappiness. But then it’s over and done; and the board can have confidence that internal issues are being handled professionally and mistakes acknowledged.

And I would have absolutely come to the School Board in March at the moment Hutek got a “payment schedule” from K12 related to the invalid Sales Quote.

Not doing either makes everything look sketchy and invites more and more questions. As long as I’m on the School Board, the days of hoping issues go away by ignoring them is over.

Some time in March 2018

Hutek acquiesces to K12/Fuel Education’s requests for a testimonial/press release.

K12 stated they would be writing a press release regarding the portal approximately one month following its release this past January.  After approximately two months and multiple conversations regarding me providing a statement, I reluctantly complied with their request.

May 14, 2018

This is the dateline of a K12 article article/testimonial on its website titled: “Fuel Education Enables Polk County, Florida Students to Self-Enroll in District Online Courses”. 

Here is a key excerpt:

Polk County Public Schools has partnered with FuelEd for years to provide students with quality online content. Recently, Polk County Public Schools asked FuelEd to help them create a custom enrollment portal to make it easier for students to use these courses to fulfill their state requirements rather than turn to outside providers. To see the Polk County portal, click here: https://polk.fueleducation.com/

I cannot figure out how to access the portal from any online location other than this K12/Fuel Education press release.

I do not remember asking FuelED or K12 or anyone to create a “custom enrollment portal.” The summary of the contract I voted for in May 2017 did not include any reference to a “custom enrollment portal.”  I am going to scour the actual contract to see if I can find any such reference.

This article testimonial goes on to quote Hutek as saying:

“The Student Enrollment Portal has been an excellent solution for Polk County Public Schools on multiple fronts,” said Dr. Marc Hutek, Assistant Superintendent of Polk County Public Schools. “We’ve had a great experience using FuelEd for the blended learning courses that we offer in our schools, so we offered students FuelEd to fulfill their online course graduation requirement. The Portal not only streamlines the enrollment process and is simple for students to use, but it is helping us keep more funding in the district by recovering those funds that have been traditionally lost to other virtual programs.”

As a general rule, I don’t know when or if the School Board authorized District employees to take part in marketing material for businesses.

May 15, 2018

Jackie Byrd introduces Auburndale High School Principal John Hill as the new Deputy Superintendent. He is the permanent replacement for John Small. Hill has been a successful principal at Auburndale High for 11 years. Hill was not my top choice; but that’s no reflection on him. I have only heard good things about him. I fully expect that he will become a successful deputy.

Hill beat out Hutek, who was not my top choice either, as well as other candidates.

May 23 or 24th

I hear about the possible existence of a $1.8 million K12 deal for the first time — and put together the John Small relationship for the first time.

In fairness to Small, he has never hidden his employment with K12. In fact, he handed me a K12 contact card on May 22 at an event. I’ve always, personally, had a pleasant relationship with Small. But that really doesn’t matter for any of this.

It’s the District’s job to police and communicate our relationships with vendors — and make sure they serve our community’s interests. To that end, on the night of May 24th, I send this email to most of our top leadership and John Small’s K12 email address.

“I have said many times in many ways in public meetings and one-on-one conversations that I want to be made aware of personal relationships with major contractors.

So it troubles me that John Small is a vice president and Jacque Bowen apparently affiliated with K12 and that these relationships have never been openly discussed at the board level.

I will discuss them at the next meeting.

I’m now trying to go back and figure out what exactly I’ve voted for on this. I asked Susan to inquire about this earlier today. But it’s probably easier for everybody to do it myself. Please respond to me, rather than her.

Please provide me a detailed account of our contracting history with K-12, what precisely we use K-12 for, and how much we are spending on them. Please confirm if it is true that we recently purchased more than 5,000 K12 licenses and that fewer than 200 are being used.

I want to know if I have voted for a K12 deal that John Small helped negotiate without my knowing it. I honestly don’t know. But I will find out. And if I missed something I should have caught, I will take responsibility for it with the public.

The Polk School District is not a piggybank for people who used to work here — or people who have relationships with our leadership. I made that clear when I discussed Acceleration Academy and the SIS system with several of you.

We have a history of relationships blowing up in the taxpayers faces and our faces.”

It’s almost of full month now since I sent that. I still don’t have a detailed accounting.

May 25, 2018

The next day, I ask for Marc Hutek to call me because various sources told me that he objected to whatever the K12 deal was and suffered for it. To my surprise, he calls me back.

I also had been told that his objection to the deal may have played a role in him not getting the permanent deputy superintendent job. I wanted to know if that was true. As you can imagine, that’s a sensitive conversation, and I wanted to protect Hutek from any fallout for speaking with me. So I only referred obliquely to this discussion, with no names attached, in trying to explain K12 background to the public.

Later, the District indicated that Hutek’s discussion with me reflected some sort of official response to my email to leadership. With that in mind, I feel it’s appropriate to recount the content that we discussed on the call.

For the record, Hutek told me he did not think he lost the permanent deputy superintendent job because of the K12 issue. The rest of what he told me was confusing and inconclusive. I came away certain that there had been some kind of K12 deal proposed; but I was distinctly unclear as to whether it happened. And why or why not.

I had hoped Harrison School of the Arts Principal Daryl Ward would get the deputy superintendent job. I told Jackie Byrd in a very brief conversation some weeks ago that I thought Ward’s skill set would help her in managing relationships within the organization and the community. I also made it clear that it was, obviously, her call to make.

Jackie chose Hill, which is a perfectly reasonable decision. I support Jackie’s choice and John Hill and wish him well. I think he shares some of the skill sets I like in Daryl Ward. Hill created an excellent community climate at AHS.

But I don’t want anyone punished for standing up and trying to do the right thing, if that is, in fact, what Marc Hutek did, of which I remain unsure.

June 1, 2018

After waiting a week for the District to provide any written acknowledgement of my K12 requests, much less any documentation of our relationship with K12, I publish an article titled: “John Small, K12, the Looneys, and staff’s contempt for your elected School Board”

It tells what I know and don’t know about K12. In writing this article, I make public the internal email I sent to leadership a week before.

Later that day, about 4:30 p.m., Hutek sends a fairly detailed email to Byrd describing the “portal” and providing an explanation, supported by content from Polk Virtual School. I only have the email in PDF and it’s fairly long. I can’t screenshot it effectively.

But it doesn’t say anything different than what’s already been said here. I don’t know why it took another week to share that basic information with me.

June 7, 2018

After another week passes, Superintendent Byrd finally sends a response by email to my questions about K12.

She asks me to “retract” something, but doesn’t specify what. I haven’t retracted anything. Here is her full statement, which was accompanied by many of the documents now cited in this timeline.

Mr. Townsend,

It has come to my attention that posts appearing on your website as of last Friday (June 1st) contain serious and false allegations implying that the Administration has acted inappropriately with K-12, one of three State /School Board approved vendors providing online educational services for Polk Virtual School.  I am writing this letter to provide you with accurate, factual information regarding this issue and to request your retraction of the inaccurate allegations you’ve made.  While I understand that your sources are employees of the Polk County School system, that does not mean it is factual information.  

Florida law requires that the School Board give students and parents a choice of at least three vendors who can provide online educational services through the Polk Virtual School.  It is the parents and students who decide which vendor they wish to utilize, and each vendor is paid by the School Board based on the number of students utilizing that vendor.  The School Board has no role in suggesting, promoting, favoring or otherwise designating any particular vendor over the other two vendors. 

K-12 has been a vendor for the Polk Virtual School since 2009 when Dr. Gail McKinzie was the Superintendent.  The agreement with K-12 provides that they will be paid a specified fee for each student who selects the K-12 program for that student’s online education services.  The agreement with K-12 provides no fixed amount or minimum number of students for which it will be paid.  That agreement has been approved by the School Board each year since 2009, and I can provide you with copies of those agenda items.  The current one-year contract will expire this July, and after that date I expect it to again come before the School Board for renewal, together with agreements by other vendors.  K-12 has received no favored treatment over any of the other vendors providing these online education services. 

A possible source of the confusion regarding this issue is a “Sales Quote”, valid for 30 days, of $1.8 million for 550 blocks of 10 enrolled users that Marc Hutek signed on May 26, 2017.  A copy of that quote is attached with this letter.  In all honesty, I do not know just what Mr. Hutek understood this document to involve since he clearly lacked the authority to bind the School Board.  In any event, it was never acted upon and nothing went before the School Board based upon this “Sales Quote”. 

Dr. Hutek brought this to my attention several months after he signed it; I immediately asked that the matter be reviewed.  As the result of my request, a meeting was held last fall with representatives of K-12, including Don Kidd, Vice President, John Small, Dr. Hutek and myself.  Attached to this letter is Dr. Hutek’s memorandum confirming this meeting and the action taken.

As previously explained, K-12 has not been treated more favorably than the other vendors who provide these online educational services.  Parents and students are free to choose the vendor they wish to use, and all three vendors are paid solely based on the selections made by the parents and students. 

The statements on your website strongly suggest that K-12 has received some sort of favorable treatment because of their relationship with John Small, who is well-known to members of the Administration after his years of service to the School Board.  This assertion is totally incorrect. I consider your suggestion of inappropriate actions by me as Superintendent and/or by members of the Administration to be inappropriate and counter-productive to our efforts to provide quality education to the students in our schools. 

I regret that your requests or inquiries cannot be answered immediately, especially during the hectic, final days of the school year.  For the sake of our schools and the thousands of people participating in and impacted by our schools, I would respectfully request your restraint in publishing inaccurate and suggestive ideas that deeply impinge on the goodwill that we each should share and promote.  

I reply that night to Byrd, Small, Bridges, and Hutek with a question.

I appreciate the documentation you’ve sent. Quick question about the fall meeting: could any of you please tell me who John Small’s employer was at the time of the meeting referenced in Dr. Hutek’s March email involving K12 and district personnel?
Also, could one of you provide me the date of that meeting? At your earliest convenience is fine.
Thanks. Have a good evening.

I have not received a request to retract any specific sentence, phrase, or word. So I have not retracted anything I’ve written. I do continue to edit these timelines as information is updated.

June 9, 2018

Hutek responds. He is the only recipient of the June 7 email to respond thus far.

I was unable to identify the exact date for the meeting that occurred.  I have narrowed the timeline to sometime between the last week of October to the first 2 weeks of November of 2017.  Also, I am not aware of when John Small went to work for K12.  

He later confirms that Small was representing K12 in the Fall meeting.

June 12, 2018

Hutek states in an email, responding to my questions, that John Small directed him to sign the K12/Fuel Education “Sales Quote” in May. He also provides some background detail on the K12 portal press release and testimonial.

Here is the full email exchange.

Polk County does not appear to be using this Polk Virtual School portal — which is quite nice.

Yet K12/FuelEd says that we asked them to build it. And the Polk District gave a testimonial for K12 marketing material saying how well it works for our kids. That does not make much sense to me.

My current understanding of the situation is this: The Polk County District gave a marketing testimonial for a private business that hired and currently employs John Small, who was Polk’s deputy superintendent as recently as September 2017.  It is my understanding from District statements that the Polk District gave this testimonial about a product that we did not buy and that we are not using. Nevertheless, we talked about how well it has worked for our kids. The date of the marketing material is 5/14/2018.

Is my understanding incorrect?

The student self-enrollment portal is up and running and yes we are using it.  Course enrollments are still low due to it coming online following the beginning of second semester and not having NCAA approval for the courses.

A few other questions:

Was this portal in use at some point? If so, why have we changed portals?

It came online in January and has been in use.  Students may use it even during the summer.  Other than FLVS, we do not have another portal. 

Who authorized/instructed Marc Hutek to give a testimonial about this portal? When did he give that quote?

K12 stated they would be writing a press release regarding the portal approximately one month following its release this past January.   After approximately two months and multiple conversations regarding me providing a statement, I reluctantly complied with their request. 

Who authorized/directed Marc Hutek to sign the Sales Quote on 5/26/2017? Or did he sign it completely on his own initiative?

John Small directed me to sign the quote and stated since it was not superintendent/Board approved, it was not considered a contract only a quote.

Key questions still outstanding

What was the point of signing the May 2018 Sales Quote with K12/Fuel Education.

When did the Polk School District ask for a “custom enrollment portal” from K12? Who, specifically, asked for it? Where is the contract for creating one?

Is this the portal that the District “asked FuelED” to create? If so, why is it accessible only through K12 marketing material at this link?

Why is this the Polk Virtual School public facing interface in service right now? Here is the link.

 

Are district employees allowed to participate in marketing material for private businesses?

Superintendent Jackie Byrd says of the “Sales Quote”: “Dr. Hutek brought this to my attention several months after he signed it.” Why? What prompted that?

Why was John Small allowed to represent K12 in a meeting with District staff about the Sales Quote just weeks after he retired from the District? Why was the School Board not told about this?

What happened in that meeting? Is there a record?

What was the “payment schedule” K12 provided to the District for the Sales Quote in March of 2018?

Has any money exchanged hands between K12 and the Polk District related to the Sales Quote signed in late May — as opposed to the contract approved two weeks before? Or related to the portal?

One comment

  1. Does the contract with Fuel cover a specific number of students? Or is it open-ended with the district obliged to pay for every student who enrolls?