A State of Oklahoma Question

   In addition to the several questions asked of EPIC officials in previous posts, Senator Ron Sharp (representing the State of Oklahoma) has posed another question for EPIC and the Oklahoma State Department of Education (SDE). Before we repeat Senator Sharp's question (and receive no answer, as usual), a look back at the last several months of EPIC and SDE records requests may be helpful.
   In March, Senator Sharp requested the SDE provide the financial records of EPIC in regards to his work on Senate committees studying EPIC expenditures and revenue. After three months of hearing nothing from the SDE, Senator Sharp requested an update on progress fulfilling the open records request. The SDE reported that they were working on it, but the State Senator would be charged $850 for the labor involved. It is important to note that state agencies are allowed to charge a fee for providing open records documents to private citizens and companies, and often ranges between 25 and 50 cents per page. The requested documentation of EPIC's financial transactions in this case, was requested by a public official charged with the financial well-being of the State of Oklahoma - a state senator. The SDE official which has typically responded to open records requests is Brad Clark, SDE General Counsel. After three and a half months of delays and stonewalling, it is assumed the SDE provided the requested documentation at the end of June.
   Around June 20, 2019, it became apparent to many Oklahoma teachers that some personal information had been disclosed to EPIC, as many if not all of Oklahoma's approximately 40,000 teachers and educators began to receive recruiting brochures in the mail and ads to their personal e-mail accounts. The Frontier reported that an "open records" request had been made to the SDE from EPIC which requested the personal mail and e-mail accounts for all public educators. The EPIC official responsible for requesting the addresses and accounts was the EPIC Communications Director, Shelly Hickman. If EPIC was charged 50 cents for processing and providing the 40,000 records, it may have cost $20,000 for all educator records, although it is still unclear just what the SDE charged EPIC.
   What is clear, however, is that the SDE responded to the two open records requests quite differently, treating a state congressman's request with delays and even disdain, but EPIC's request with compliance and secret expediency. The answer to the question of why the responses by the SDE were so diametrically different may be found in the personal connections to the SDE and EPIC. Brad Clark, chief legal counsel for the SDE and Joy Hofmeister, are responsible for deciding what open record requests can be filled and those that cannot. Clark was formerly employed by Bill Hickman's law firm before being hired by Joy Hofmeister and the SDE. Bill Hickman is the husband of Shelly Hickman, EPIC Communications Director (and reponsible for EPIC open records requests). Shelly Hickman formerly worked for the SDE in the same role she now has for EPIC. Is anyone really surprised that the two open records requests were treated differently? Follow the money...
   Now, to repeat State Senator Ron Sharp's question: Why did the SDE provide allocations to EPIC Blended Charter School for grade levels the school has publicly acknowledged did not exist for the school years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019? The revelation that EPIC Blended School received public funding for students not enrolled, sounds familiar with the OSBI investigation into EPIC Virtual Charter Schools for receiving public funding for students enrolled in private schools and EPIC. Again, follow the money.. The SDE has privately acknowledged that it did provide the funding for imaginary grade levels and students enrolled in both private schools and EPIC, but seems to blame the potential misappropriation of public funds on the lowly regional accreditation officer (RAO) who approved the student count (ADM). If that is Joy Hofmeister and Brad Clark's defense of possible misappropriation of public funds, then the RAO should be fired. It should not absolve the SDE leadership of responsibility though.
   We have another question for Shelly Hickman, Communications Director for EPIC: With the knowledge that EPIC Blended Charter received funding for non-existent grade levels and subsequent student ADM, why didn't EPIC return the misappropriated funds? We have no doubt this question will not be answered along with Senator Sharp's question, until someone more important than a public educator or state senator asks. Follow the money...
   An article in the Tulsa World raised some more questions for EPIC and the SDE - Tulsa World reporter Andrea Eger asked the SDE : (Paraphrased) What are the state requirements for (EPIC) Blended Learning Center student attendance? Brad Clark, SDE General Counsel, responded that BLC is subject to the same attendance requirements that brick and mortar (traditional) schools are. Emily Long of Price Lang Consulting (EPIC's outsourced consulting firm) responded to Brad Clark's answer by saying "that statement is wrong". OK, I have a question: Who is lying? the SDE? or EPIC? Follow the money...
   SDE Accreditation Officers (RAO) are those employees which routinely monitor public school reports for accuracy and mistakes. The reports audited include the grade level and student membership for every public school in the state. If only one student has been coded incorrectly by a school - the RAO always catches the mistake and corrects it, so that no school receives more funding than it should or less. All public schools receive the exact amount of funding through the formula based on the Average Daily Membership (ADM) for each. Schools do not receive state or SDE appropriated funding until the RAOs audit membership reports... until now. Evidently EPIC has received maybe millions of dollars for students they don't have. If school RAO's catch even the slightest miscalculation in school membership reports, how did this EPIC mistake get by the SDE? Is it misappropriation by the SDE... and complicity by EPIC? or intentional misleading reports by EPIC and complicity by the SDE? Either way, crimes could have been committed. Follow the money..
Update July 17, 2019: ... and then there's this... What other entities could be implicated?
Update July 18, 2019: Joy Hofmeister, State Superintendent, stated that the OSBI investigation and subsequent potential indictment of racketeers and embezzlers is "very serious and disturbing". She also stated that the SDE stands ready to cooperate fully in the OSBI investigation into embezzlement and racketeering. To absolve the SDE of any responsibility of the racketeering or embezzlement charges, it should prove that it had no prior knowledge of the shenanigans of the owners, Chaney and Harris. Several educators and a State Senator believe the SDE had prior knowledge of these crimes, but failed to acknowledge or report to law enforcement. The SDE 'standing ready to fully cooperate with the OSBI' in the matter may mean that someone may be thrown under the school bus...
Update July 19,2019: Racketeering is only one of the crimes being investigated by the OSBI during its EPIC sweep. "A racket, according to the current common and most general definition, is an organized criminal act in which the criminal act is some form of substantial business, or a way to earn illegal money either regularly, or briefly but repeatedly... However, originally and often still specifically, a 'racket' referred to a criminal act in which the perpetrator (perp) or perps fraudulently offer a service to solve a nonexistent problem... Conducting a racket is racketeering. Particularly, the potential problem may be caused by the same party (of racketeers) that offers to solve it, but the fact may be concealed, with the specific intent to engender continual patronage for this party." (wikipedia). "Profiteering is a pejorative term for the act of making a profit by methods considered unethical" and goes hand-in-hand with racketeering.
   We may apply EPIC's business model for public education to the racketeering and profiteering definitions to see if the glove truly fits, and if it does, you must not acquit. In the EPIC case, the nonexistent problem to be solved is the "poor" public education being forced on students of traditional public schools. The service being offered to solve the nonexistent problem is the EPIC model of schoolin'. EPIC has engendered continual patronage with the running of its nonstop TV, Radio, and social media ads. The perps in the EPIC case may be Chaney and Harris, EPIC owners, but may also be several others receiving unethical profits. Those "others" could be the several elected officials who've received almost $200,000 in campaign donations from EPIC, and would include the Oklahoma State Superintendent of Schools, the Oklahoma Attorney General, an Oklahoma County district judge, many Oklahoma State Representatives and Senators, and even the Governor. While it is doubtful that all involved in the EPIC case will be indicted on embezzlement or racketeering, I'd still be very worried if I unethically profited at the expense of Oklahoma taxpayers...
Update July 21, 2019: Continued...