Board approves 2-year contract with Primary Class (DBA Odyssey) after debate on past performance and reimbursements

The board voted 12-1 to approve a two-year contract with options to renew with Primary Class, doing business as Odyssey, to administer the state scholarship program, with Member Boggess the lone dissenting vote.

Board members spent more than an hour questioning staff and discussing Odyssey’s earlier work in Idaho, Iowa and Missouri, how interest on about $120,000,000 in transferred funds would be handled, and whether parents waiting on reimbursements from the previous vendor (ACE) would be paid. Scott Jones, deputy, told members the contract makes the vendor primarily responsible for administering the program and complying with state law.

Why it matters: The contract hands day-to-day program management and parent-facing responsibilities to a private vendor amid ongoing legal uncertainty about the program and pending reimbursements from the prior contractor. Board members said clear vendor communication and strict contractual enforcement will be central to whether parents receive timely service.

Deputy Scott Jones said staff had provided the board with additional materials from Odyssey about its experience in other states and that staff would sign the contract if the board approved. "It's the law. We're the contracting entity," Jones said, describing the board's role as enforcing compliance rather than operating the program directly.

Several members urged caution but supported the recommendation. Member Booth summarized feedback she had gathered from Idaho officials and the governor's office, saying the Idaho rollout "got a lot better" over time but that Idaho ultimately contracted with a different vendor; she said she supported the recommendation while urging staff to stay vigilant. Booth also relayed an Idaho official’s view that problems there were "50% Odyssey, 50% state office of education."

Members pressed staff on whether interest accrued while funds were held by the prior vendor would be returned to the state. Jones said the contract does not restate that detail because it is established in statute, and by signing the contract the vendor agrees to follow the law. "They would need to return the interest to the state," Jones said in response to a board question about the $120,000,000.

Board members repeatedly raised communication and reimbursement concerns they had heard from parents. Member Earl said parents' biggest complaints were "the lack of communication or the inefficiency of communication," and asked for assurances that Odyssey would provide clearer, faster responses. Jones said the contract requires the vendor to publish a handbook and to operate the parental liaison role directly; staff plan to disengage from the parental liaison function after the transition so parents must resolve issues with the vendor under the contract.

On program timing and transition, staff said the vendor is expected to assume operational duties in mid‑May. Jones also told members the two‑year contract term — shorter than the five‑year arrangements the board has used previously — was chosen to allow a thorough review after initial implementation given the program's statutory and operational complexity.

Members raised the program's pending court matters. Jones said staff could not predict what a final court order would require and that any court‑ordered termination date or other conditions would affect whether and how the vendor is made whole. "If it was ruled that it was unconstitutional, then I would assume that there would be an order from the court on when to stop," Jones said, adding staff could not speculate about mitigation or reimbursement beyond what a court directs.

After discussion, Chair called the vote. The motion made by Member Hart and seconded by Member Booth carried 12 in favor, 1 opposed (Member Boggess). The board then approved the rest of the consent calendar on a subsequent motion.

Board members and staff said their next steps are to finalize the contract signature, manage the transfer of funds from the prior vendor, and oversee the vendor's initial implementation and communications with families. Staff emphasized they will monitor the vendor for contract compliance and may take enforcement action if the vendor fails to meet statutory or contractual obligations.