I have recently finished as the Project Director of a Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools (REMS) grant from the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. I wrote a grant proposal for nearly $98,000, which was used to pay for a thorough facility assessment, supplies for teachers, some radio equipment for ourselves and a local private school, staff training, and a very thorough perception assessment that let us know how we did.
Apart from my primary goal of making our school corporation safer and better prepared, I was honored to meet many dedicated professionals in the school safety field. At the beginning of the grant period, I sent out a Request for Proposals (RFP). This lets consultants know what I need, and how much is available. They then submit proposals to see if what they offer will fit, and can be afforded.
Having previously been acquainted with several consultants, one of whom helped me with a previously unsuccessful REMS grant proposal, I decided to use a blind committee to screen the proposals. I had split up my grant into three sections; the assessment, the training, and the evaluation. Each section would initially have separate consultants, until I had a chance to identify gaps in our corporation's preparedness. Each proposal had all company references removed, and a panel of three administrators, none of whom were otherwise involved with the process and two of whom were certified Indiana School Safety Specialists, evaluated each proposal using a rubric developed for purpose.
As I stated earlier, I had developed working relationships, and even friendships, with several school safety consultants prior to this grant proposal. One helped me write my previous failed grant proposal, whose failure was all of my own doing. Another consultant helped me write the new proposal. There was nothing promised, nothing implied in the assistance. He was confident his company would be in the running, and I was removed from the selection process. He and several other consultants were called by me to inform them of the RFP.
Everyone I spoke to was gracious and grateful of the opportunity, except for the consultant who had assisted me on the prior grant proposal. He recognized some language in the proposal from a competitor, and became quite hostile on the phone. I was taken a bit aback, as I had thought we had a good relationship, indicated by the personal phone call to deliver the RFP. I was puzzled, as he had done a similar thing for me a couple of years earlier. At the end of the call, I specifically asked the consultant if this meant that he was not going to participate in the RFP. He said that he would absolutely NOT participate under "these conditions".
That evening I received an email from him, sent to my superintendent of schools and the Board of School Trustees President, and cc'd to me. It accused me of unethical behavior, as well as rule violations. The next morning I contacted my Federal Project Officer and informed her of the phone call. She asked me for details, which I provided, and the only thing she asked me to do was make sure I had a written process for appeals, which I was more than glad to do.
In the end, the committee selected three companies for the grant. Each consultant that participated was called and informed. Each consultant graciously thanked me for the opportunity, and asked that I keep them in mind for future endeavors. Not one appeal was filed.
During the course of the grant activities, I had the opportunity to collaborate with another REMS recipient whose school corporation was adjacent to mine. During the training, the REMS Project Director for that corporation and I talked about the problems we faced as Project Directors. I told her the above story, and she looked at me in amazement and said that was odd, as that consultant had helped her write her grant proposal. She was less then thrilled with this consultant's work on her grant, which included taking less time to conduct a security assessment of her high school than it would have taken me to just walk through it. We shook our heads at the apparent insanity of the school safety world, and got back to work.
The long and short of it is this: there are many dedicated school safety consultants out there. You have to be careful not to hook up with one like I describe above. Check references, read their blogs. A person's writing can tell you a lot about a person, especially over the long-term. While consultants need to talk themselves up a bit, is that all their writing is about? Do they offer true insights, or do they tear people down? Do they build capacity in schools, or do they need to return for 'refreshers'? Ask around, people who have dealt with consultants can tell you what kind of job they've done, and how they conducted themselves during their work.
Ask yourself, if I were to hire this person to care for my kids, what information would I want to know, and then find that information. The children in schools are yours, by proxy, so make sure the ones who work to keep them safe are quality people. Make sure they know what they're doing, and ask what their background is in education. If they are former law enforcement, check on their law enforcement record. Prior military? Check on their military record. Ask, and see how they take your question. Remember, past behavior is a good indicator of future performance.
I was honored to meet and talk to the numerous school safety professionals during the course of my REMS grant. There are always a few bad apples in every profession. In the end, quality will show, both in performance and in character.
Take the time to check out both.
No comments:
Post a Comment