By Adam Pagnucco.
Back in October, MCPS was in the throes of the Joel Beidleman scandal, in which allegations of sexual harassment against a principal led to the fall of a superintendent. One of the things the school system did in response was to hire a crisis management contractor. How much did MCPS pay this contractor and what did it do?
Here is what happened when one of the county’s most persistent education advocates tried to find out.
First, let’s identify the contractor. At its October 12 meeting, the school board approved an emergency procurement contract for $105,000 with Precision Strategies LLC of Washington DC. The responsible office was the Office of Communications. The contract description stated, “New contract award to provide crisis management and communication support services from a team of experienced crisis communication strategists.” The contract was extended for the same amount at the board’s February 6 meeting.
Precision Strategies provides a wealth of communications services including strategic communications, digital, advertising, video, data, mobilization, branding and much more. It was founded by Obama campaign veterans Stephanie Cutter, Jen O’Malley Dillon and Teddy Goff and works for companies, campaigns and other entities. There is no arguing with its qualifications although one doubts that it works on the cheap.
County education advocate Brigid Howe filed a Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) request seeking the following:
1. The contract, including scope and terms, that was approved by the Board of Education in its Oct. 23, 2023, meeting for $105,000 for crisis communications.
2. Any invoices that have been submitted to MCPS for payment by Precision Strategies.
3. Any attachments or additional information supporting the February contract extension request for an additional $105,000.
MCPS’s response contained one page, which is reprinted below.
That’s it. One contract review form. Not a contract. No scope. No invoices. No work product. No other information. Howe asked for all of this. The review form referred to “an amendment or renewal of PSA or MOU,” an “MCPS Form 235-3, Justification” and an “approved overspending memo attached.” None of these documents were provided to Howe.
So other than the one-page review form, which contains little additional information beyond what was reported on the school board’s agenda, we know nothing about the contract with this firm. It could have done nothing and been paid nothing. We don’t know exactly why it was hired (although readers are welcome to speculate)! We don’t know the term of the extension. We don’t know whether it will be hired again. We just know that the contract exists, was approved and was extended. That’s about it.
This contract joins any potential settlement with Beidleman in the land of items relevant to the scandal that may never fully enter the public domain. Once again, the school board’s promises of transparency are called into question.