Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Home School Enrichment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears controversial proposal to authorize home‑school enrichment programs; no contract approved
Summary
Presenters asked the district to authorize and contract with Keystone Education Services to manage local home‑school enrichment programs after a recent state rule change; board members and speakers raised concerns about the company's recent formation, potential financial and audit burdens, and conflicts of interest. No authorization was adopted at the meeting.
Pastor Glenn Freiberg asked the Pueblo County School District 70 board to consider contracting with Keystone Education Services to authorize and manage local home‑school enrichment programs after recent state rule changes that he said require local authorizers.
"The state is now changing those rules, and they're requiring any new programs or any growth of programs this year to have a local authorizer," Freiberg said while outlining a proposed contract in which the program operator would receive about 87 percent of the per‑pupil revenue (PPR), Keystone would retain roughly 6.5 percent for compliance management and the district would receive an oversight share.
The pitch focused on giving homeschool families more scheduling options and on Keystone handling the compliance, data reporting and auditing work that local authorizers must perform. Freiberg said Keystone has staffed teams that already oversee campuses elsewhere in Colorado and that the aim was to avoid creating new district workloads for instruction.
Board members and district staff pressed Freiberg for details about scale, financial handling and liability. Several trustees said they received documents only shortly before the meeting and questioned Keystone’s recent formation. "I have concerns that the organization I came early tonight to read what was delivered to me. And if I'm not mistaken, your organization's about a month old," one trustee said, asking for more time and legal review.
District staff and board members also raised financial and audit risks tied to authorizing programs: attendance counts feed state payments and state audits can trigger clawbacks. A board member referenced a past experience authorizing PCA, which led to reconciliation problems and money owed to the district. District staff reminded the board that authorizers retain ultimate responsibility for reporting and any special‑education obligations, though presenters said home‑school enrichment programs are not required to provide IEP services.
Public comment largely echoed the board’s split. Several speakers urged caution and alleged conflicts of interest tied to local actors; Roxy Pennell called the arrangement "a money grab." Others, including parents and teachers, urged the board to consider partnerships to serve families who rely on enrichment options and said such programs can supplement—but not replace—public schools.
Board members did not vote to authorize a contract with Keystone during the meeting. Trustees emphasized the timing constraints imposed by recent state decisions but said they would rely on further information from legal counsel and administrators before any authorization or formal contract consideration.
The board moved on to other agenda items without adopting a contract; the discussion will likely return to the board after staff and counsel provide more detailed assessments of financial, legal and operational implications.
