Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Principal Coaching topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jefferson County selects two vendors to coach principals at low-performing schools
Summary
The Jefferson County Board of Education approved a consent item that moves forward contracts with two vendors to provide principal coaching for low-performing schools; district staff said the firms were chosen to ensure capacity and complementary strengths and that school-level action plans and metrics will guide accountability.
District staff told the Jefferson County Board of Education on June 9 that two vendors were selected through a short request-for-proposals process to provide principal coaching for schools identified as low-performing.
A staff member said the RFP was run for seven days in May and that the district chose Bailey Education Group and SchoolKit because the firms offer different but complementary strengths: Bailey for leadership stabilization and operational systems, SchoolKit for instructional-systems coaching. "The RFP was run by Dr. Marshall and a team of multiple representatives across departments," the staff member said, explaining the competition and selection.
Officials said the work is intended to support principals at schools that need intensive help. The district said about 68 schools have areas that fall in the bottom 5% statewide and that 14 schools have been identified by the state as needing intensive support. The district will develop individual action plans and school-by-school metrics to measure impact rather than relying on counting coaching sessions alone, a staff member said.
Board members asked how the district will choose which vendor works with each school and how the district will end a relationship if a vendor does not deliver. Staff said there was no set quota for the number of vendors chosen; the selection was based on capacity and the need to measure impact. "It will be on a year-to-year contract," a staff member said, adding the district has not finalized deliverables and will set those by school prior to contracting.
A board member raised a question about whether any employee had a relationship with one of the selected firms; a district representative replied, "No. No employee has a relationship with any one of these firms," and said prior associations, if any, did not influence the current selection.
The board subsequently approved the consent item that included the vendor awards as part of its consent calendar vote.
What happens next: district staff said they expect to return to the board with contract documents and the school-level action plans that will define deliverables and metrics for the coming school year.
