ST. LOUIS • A state audit of ºüÀêÊÓƵ Public Schools says the district is violating the law by promoting thousands of students who cannot adequately read to the next grade level.
The finding was part of a report released Wednesday by Missouri Auditor Thomas Schweich, who took the school district to task on a number of issues from financial planning to not doing enough to prevent test fraud. Schweich said the district was uncooperative at times, challenging his office’s authority to even conduct its review.
But what troubled Schweich the most is the district’s practice of moving children to the next grade level even though their reading skills are sub par.
More than 2,000 students tested at the “below basic†level — the lowest performance category — in the 2011 and 2012 reading section of the Missouri Assessment Program. Yet just 158 and 128 students were held back those years, respectively. Holding back each child who is behind in reading, as mandated by state law, would be too costly, administrators told Schweich’s staff.
People are also reading…
“I don’t know what the priorities are as far as finances go, but at least in our view students who can’t read should be the highest financial priority,†Schweich said in downtown ºüÀêÊÓƵ.
Rick Sullivan, president of the district’s state-imposed Special Administrative Board, said the retention issue was a tough problem to solve.
“The number of students who would be retained would be staggering,†he said. “But that’s the question people have asked for years and years.â€
Superintendent Kelvin Adams said the district took other steps to help children who cannot read well, such as enroll them in summer school, provide tutoring and other targeted measures. Dozens of studies over the years show that students held back are more likely to drop out of school.
“The remedy of keeping kids back in and of itself doesn’t solve the problem,†Adams said. “We could be in compliance of keeping every kid back and not be providing the best education option for students. We want to make sure we do both, and that’s what we’re working to do at every grade.â€
The audit comes less than a month after a performance rating by the state concluded that the district was again at risk of losing state accreditation, though a review before 2015 is unlikely.
The audit gives ºüÀêÊÓƵ schools a “fair†rating. This translates to a “C,†Schweich said. Some members of his staff argued for a “poor†rating based on obstacles encountered during the process.
“No one likes to be audited. I understand that,†Schweich said. “But rule No. 1 of auditing is, auditors are there to do their job.â€
TESTING ISSUES
The report criticizes the district for not doing enough to prevent school staff from tampering with state standardized exams. In 2012 Adams stepped up efforts to ensure test results were valid, after the Post-Dispatch and national media reported allegations of test tampering at several ºüÀêÊÓƵ schools.
Schweich found that records from employees recently hired to monitor testing were incomplete. When his team asked for the monitoring forms later that year, 100 were missing from about 30 schools. Most were eventually recovered.
Adams later said the remainder of the forms weren’t submitted because there was nothing to report. At three schools with missing forms, he said, students were too young to be tested.
The audit did not point to specific instances of test fraud. It did, however, reveal that the district is not investigating any statistically improbable rises or falls in test scores at any of its 72 schools.
“We’re not experts on cheating,†Schweich said. “What we looked at is, are there procedures in place to ensure there isn’t cheating.â€
The completion of the ºüÀêÊÓƵ Public Schools audit means Schweich has audited four of the state’s largest school districts — a goal of his after taking office in 2011. He has audited Rockwood, Kansas City and Springfield schools, and has reviews under way of several districts in suburban Kansas City and rural Missouri.
Schweich said he would return to ºüÀêÊÓƵ in 90 days to see whether the district had implemented the recommendations.
BIDDING AND OVERSIGHT
The report says the district needs to re-examine its bidding procedures, because too many construction contracts are being awarded to sole bidders. The school bus contract had gone to the same company since 2004 and hadn’t been put out to bid. In 2012 the district paid First Student almost $24 million for transportation.
The audit also exposed the district’s lack of oversight over the 1,000 or so educational programs at its schools. The district’s accountability staff is responsible for monitoring those programs. But budget cuts mean two people today are doing the work eight did several years ago. In 2010, the staff was evaluating just 10 programs a year.
“That’s 1 percent,†Schweich said. “It would take 100 years to evaluate all the programs at that level. That’s not an effective level of program evaluation.â€
As Schweich spoke, Adams and Sullivan watched from the back of the room. Both have been praised in recent years for progress the district has made in academics, finances and other areas.
“I’m disappointed to hear this because I think a great deal of progress has been made in ºüÀêÊÓƵ Public Schools, but there clearly is more work to do,†Sullivan said.
When asked what part of the audit troubled him the most, Adams said, “All of it.†The district already has begun implementing some of the recommendations, he said.
FINANCIAL IMPROVEMENTS
Schweich pointed out a bright spot. He said efforts to rein in deficit spending through closing schools and reducing staff had been effective. A one-time settlement from a desegregation agreement in 2012 erased $55 million of debt, and it is paying for a list of district needs such as preschool expansion. He warned, however, that the funding runs out in June.
“We are not 100 percent confident the district has a plan on how to deal with that,†Schweich said.
To ensure district funds are being spent effectively, Schweich recommended that the school district hire an internal auditor.
“It’s a $375 million-a-year business,†he said of the school district. “I don’t know of many $375 million businesses that don’t have an internal audit function.â€
Adams said that he had tried for two years to hire an internal auditor but that candidates had said the salary wasn’t enough.
The audit wasn’t Schweich’s first in the district. In 2011, he found irregularities in attendance and enrollment records at Patrick Henry Downtown Academy. The principal there was alleged to have manipulated data to meet standards set by the federal No Child Left Behind law.
Because state funding is determined by how many hours students spend in school, Schweich recommended attendance be adjusted. It never was, according to Wednesday’s audit.
The adjustments would have meant a difference of $54,000 to $145,000 in state funds, “which was considered immaterial,†the district’s response in the report says.
“I don’t think that’s an acceptable response,†Schweich said.
No one action triggered the audit of ºüÀêÊÓƵ schools, though members of the district’s disempowered elected board have urged Schweich for years to do a review. Members of the elected board attended the presentation and later criticized the Special Administrative Board for the uncooperative tone set by the district.
“How can a state-approved board not work with the state auditor?†asked David Jackson, president of the board. “What else are you hiding?
Sullivan said he regreted that the district had sent a letter to the auditor challenging his authority, calling it a misstep.
“There was full cooperation throughout the whole audit process. That question — the challenge — took place even before the audit started.â€