Where In the World is Patricia Wright?

Public records show that Virginia's Superintendent of Public Instruction, Patricia Wright, enjoyed some $22,350 worth of international travel in 2010-11 at the expense of companies that do business (or would like to) with the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE).

Her trips have taken her to some lovely places -- London, England (twice); Lisbon, Portugal; Petropolis and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Korolev, Russia.  

What companies?  Why, Pearson, through its “philanthropic arm” the Pearson Foundation.  Pearson, of course, is the educational services company that (for a mere $110 million) administers the Virginia SOL tests under contract with VDOE.  Also Verizon, and Intel, and Microsoft, and HP, just to name some others you might recognize.  

VDOE spokesman, Charles Pyle, confirmed that Wright has attended several international conferences sponsored by Pearson and other companies that have paid her expenses and which do business with VDOE.  Pyle defended Wright's acceptance of these travel expenses and amenities stating: " [...] Like all state agency heads, Dr. Wright abides by the state conflict of interest law."  


He further acknowledged that VDOE currently has three contracts with Pearson:  

•   Standards of Learning (SOL) Program testing contract —current three-year renewable contract began July 1 for an estimated $110 million over three years.  However, actual amounts paid to Pearson each year can vary based on invoiced costs.  For instance, last year, in FY11, VDOE paid Pearson approximately $26 million for the testing contract. 

•   Development and maintenance of Virginia Student Longitudinal Data System —$3.2 million per year.  Annual contract renewals are available through FY14. Lead Turnaround Partner — three-year statewide contract entered into on behalf of affected school divisions for these services.  VDOE pays no costs on this contract.  Only affected school divisions can purchase off this contract.

Pyle claims that because Wright was not involved in these procurement processes -- other than to approve the selections that resulted from each -- the procurement processes were carried out in accordance with state law. 

REALLY? 

I asked John R. Butcher, my friend, colleague, retired attorney and author of The Cranky Taxpayer website, what his thoughts were concerning the conflict of interest question and Wright's acceptance of $22,350 in travel expenses.  He noted that while this cozy relationship may or may not pass legal tests, it certainly does not pass the smell test and raises some significant questions that Superintendent Wright should want to answer. 

Butcher's questions for the Superintendent: 

• Why do you suppose Pearson sent you to Rio instead of, say, me or the Virginia Teacher of the Year? 
• What did you learn about “Digital Innovation” in London and Lisbon that you might not have learned in Richmond or Chicago or Dallas? 
• What did Pearson think it was getting for its $5,250? 
• What did you learn about “Education for Economic Success” in London that you might not have learned in DC or Memphis? What did Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, HP, Pearson, and Promethean Brittannica think they were getting for their $1,900? 
• What did you learn about “Extending the Teaching Profession” in Petropolis and Rio that you might not have learned in New Orleans or Atlanta? What did Pearson think it was getting for its $10,500? 
• What did you learn about the International Space Olympics in Russia that you might not have learned from Google? What do you suppose Verizon thought it might get from you for its $4,700? 
• The Conflict of Interests Act provides immunity for a state official who acts in reliance upon an advisory opinion of the Attorney General.  Did you get one for any of this travel?