Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Search topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears three superintendent‑search firms, moves into closed session to discuss awarding search contract
Summary
The Warren County School Board heard presentations from three search firms—BWP, McPherson & Jacobson, and HYA—on their recruitment, community‑engagement and vetting processes, then moved into a closed meeting under Virginia code to discuss awarding a contract for the superintendent search firm.
The Warren County School Board heard hour‑long presentations from three superintendent‑search firms before moving into a closed session to discuss the award of a public contract for a superintendent search.
Representatives from BWP, led by Doctor Harris and Doctor Kasner, told the board their process emphasizes deep community engagement, tailored recruiting and confidential searches when appropriate. "We make no decisions. We make recommendations," Doctor Harris said, describing the firm’s role as presenting a vetted pool of candidates for the board’s consideration.
Dr. Ralph Sarty of McPherson & Jacobson described a five‑phase protocol that includes stakeholder surveys (provided at no cost to the district), rigorous background and reference checks, candidate videos and proactive outreach to likely matches. He described the firm’s track record placing candidates across multiple states and answered questions about maintaining confidentiality while involving selected stakeholders in the process.
HYA representatives Monica Brown and Doug outlined a four‑phase approach — engage, recruit, select and transition — that prioritizes focus groups, surveys, a leadership profile and an extended transition and onboarding phase for the newly appointed superintendent. Brown emphasized active recruiting targeted to the leadership profile the board adopts and post‑hire transition support.
Board members questioned the firms about confidentiality, stakeholder involvement, timelines and how to expedite a search with a near‑term interim superintendent in place. Several firms discussed options for confidential versus transparent searches, how to use stakeholder groups in advisory roles and timelines that could begin in July with candidate interviews later in the fall.
After the presentations, a motion was made to move into a closed meeting under Virginia Code §2.2‑3711(A)(29) to discuss the award of a public contract, including interviews of offerors and contract terms. The motion was seconded and the board conducted a roll‑call certification that the closed meeting discussed only the topics specified in the motion; the public portion of the meeting concluded with the board adjourning.
What this means
The public record does not show a final award or contract details. The closed‑session motion and subsequent certification indicate the board intended to discuss selecting or negotiating with a specific search firm; any final contract or award would be reported in subsequent public minutes or meetings.
Next steps
Board members said they expect to continue deliberations and potentially decide on a firm at an upcoming meeting; the board has another scheduled meeting next week (July 2) where further discussion may occur.
(Reporting based on the public meeting transcript.)
