The search for a superintendent at Proviso High School Township District 209 appears to be stalled after board member called on her colleagues to begin a new search.
During the April board meeting, member Arbdella Patterson said there were inconsistencies and a lack of transparency in the search to replace James L. Henderson, who resigned last summer.
That begs the question: What happens next?
So far, it’s not clear.
At a meeting last month, former board president Amanda Grant said she was “not sure how this process is going to go” and “not sure how it is going to end.” Her remarks came ahead of the board’s restructure set for the May 14 meeting.
Hazard Young Attea Associates, the district’s search firm, declined comment in the interest of fairness.
But Patricia Sullivan-Viniard, director of the executive searches department of the Illinois Association of School Boards, said that generally speaking, the board can request a do-over.
“We [IASB] have a guarantee of service that says that a board will not be forced to settle for a hire that they are not in agreement [with or] that their next superintendent is in the group that we have brought them,” she said, adding that she cannot speak about specific cases.
But, she said, “it does not happen very often.”
Finding a new superintendent
Although every hiring agency works differently, Sullivan-Viniard explained, before a search begins, most assess a district’s needs.
“We just have conversation, and of course, an open session at the beginning with the board and whoever else [to get] a sense of what the district really needs in their next leader, she said.
The information is gathered through stakeholder surveys, including the board of education, staff members, parents, guardians, community members, and students. In-person focus groups are also often conducted.
Some findings are enlightening. For example, “we are also finding out the importance of things like residing in the district, previous experience as a superintendent, and the will of the people,” she said.
After this, the data collected is typically presented to the board of education during open session before a “announcement of vacancy,” or their form of a job posting and job description, is published.
As part of the search, many districts agree to sign confidentiality agreements with candidates. Grant, for example, said at the end of April, that the search had been compromised because some board members refused to sign a confidentiality agreement. HYA, their contractor, said this was standard practice.
Sullivan-Viniard said that while every agency may not require that, most do, in part because candidates want them.
“They don’t want to burn a bridge where they are,” Sullivan-Viniard said. “They might not even make it to a final, so they don’t want their names out.”
But after someone becomes a finalist, confidentiality expectations tend to be taken off the table, especially as interviews with stakeholder groups are brought into play.
“In most cases, the board will not release the names of the finalists, but that is up to the board. Sometimes they do,” she said. “But we [IASB] will honor confidentiality as much as possible for as long as possible.”
Next steps
If Patterson calls for reopening the selection process, the district has several options.
Members can request that an earlier candidate be brought back for more interviews. This doesn’t often happen because search firms typically narrow the candidates who best fit the district’s needs. The board has also been a part of the process of narrowing down the candidates as the search progressed.
Starting from scratch could delay a hire until the 2025-26 year because it is so late in the game, Sullivan-Viniard said.
“It is almost May, and July 1 is when a superintendent starts,” she said. “The fiscal year for a school district is July 1 to June 30. In most cases, that is the work year for educators and anyone in the district. Generally, superintendents start July 1 and if one is retiring, their retirement date is June 30.”
Candidates could also accept another job.
And the cost of redoing a search? That is also depending on the contract.
“Everyone does it a little bit differently,” said Sullivan-Viniard.
According to a comment by Patterson, the district paid HYA $30,000 for the search.
Perhaps the biggest issue is whether the board can decide together to move or to accept the current candidates.
“It depends why the board was not able to reach consensus,” she said. “We [hiring agencies] bring them the best and strongest candidates. And when we take a slate of candidates to the board, we believe the next superintendent is in that group. We are not just bringing someone to round up numbers. We are taking candidates and believe any of them could do the job and do the job well.”
Patterson said during the last April meeting that there was “inconsistency in this process.”
“It has nothing to do with politics,” she said. “If you are going to do it, do it right, be transparent. That is all I am asking, and that did not take place.”
HYA likely will try to see if they can help resolve this issue, Sullivan-Viniard, said.
“It does not harm a search to have it relaunched,” she said. “People know that things happen and sometimes a board cannot reach consensus. And when it is a desirable district, in a desirable location, with a good reputation, sometimes no matter how great the district is, things can happen that can cause a search to pause or pivot. Usually when we [IASB] do a relaunch of a search it has a very successful and satisfactory ending.”
The next Proviso board meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 14 at Proviso Math and Science Academy.