I believe you’re posting this because you want the problems fixed; but in order for that to happen, you need to make it happen. There are a variety of escalation strategies to consider: you might go to your state’s secretary of education; you might go to your state’s attorney general; you might go to the press. Note that NDAs usually do not hold up when you’re making accusations of criminal activity, and some of the accusations you have made are criminal in nature. There are “whistleblower protection” laws, which vary from state to state. Also note that if someone is your lawyer, then you have the absolute iron-clad right to tell them everything (“attorney-client privilege”) regardless of what you may have signed. And if what you say is true, then there are probably quite a few groups that would happy to provide you with a lawyer, or lawyers that would work on contingency. In any case, talking to a lawyer should be your next step before taking any major action; it’s just a question of which one.
Your career as an auditor that people pay to evaluate themselves is completely doomed and you should sacrifice it before it explodes. Your career as an auditor that people pay to evaluate others has promise.
Also, you should realize that having a scandal ready to release in a controlled fashion gives you some powers, and you should think carefully about what your objectives are. Depending on the location, size, spin and time of release, you can take out any one person of authority, possibly (but not necessarily) as high as the state governor. If you have political savvy, you might maneuver into a position of authority yourself.
(To all the other commenters in this thread: this is one of those cases where you should be providing actionable options to the original poster, not going meta, not expressing outrage, not trying to collect the information to act in his place. Comment as a consequentialist, not as a conversationalist.)
Pulling a bunch of money out of the system with a lawsuit is not a winning outcome if it leaves the existing corrupt power structure in place. Be warned that for many lawyers, the goal will be money, not improvement. Do not use a lawyer whose goals are different than your own.
You should be collecting evidence. If you are ever alone with an incriminating document, photograph every page. You may later wish to allow these documents a chance to go missing (eg, by making a FOIA request) before you reveal that you’ve copied them. If you are in a state where it is legal to do so without telling anyone, record every interesting conversation. A recorded statement like “the evaluator’s job is to collude with the submitter” is a political instakill if given to the press, and the threat of releasing it is significant leverage.
Pay attention to the specific people involved, especially the ones who are higher up, and the ones who are keeping themselves hidden. Try to figure out who’s good, who’s evil, who’s smart, and who’s dumb. Try to predict how each will react to scandal. Assume that by default, the evildoers will successfully deflect blame onto the stupid, unless you have specific incriminating evidence.
Pulling a bunch of money out of the system with a lawsuit is not a winning outcome if it leaves the existing corrupt power structure in place. Be warned that for many lawyers, the goal will be money, not improvement. Do not use a lawyer whose goals are different than your own.
This is good advice in general for dealing with the tort portion of the US legal system. But we shouldn’t forget the general deterrence effect of money damages.
And in education law in particular, money damages for being a negligent educator are essential impossible to get, so the extreme money grubbers aren’t in this market. In special education, money damages simply for having a stupid education plan are unavailable under the most important special education statute.
That said, the rest of this post is excellent advice.
In particular, if any of the children evaluated are in special education, parents have fairly strong leverage to punish school districts who are doing stuff that no one could think would work. Attorneys and non-attorney advocates in all 50 US states are available to help the parents, who often have no idea what their rights are or that the school district is being foolish.
Separately, the American’s with Disabilities Act prohibits retaliation against anyone who acts to protect a disabled individual’s rights. Alas, proving this is a difficult matter. You might consider looking at my post on one way to document verbal statements in writing.
And for clarity, disabled in this context is a broader label than cognitively impaired, blind, or deaf. If a child has a medical condition that impairs their ability to learn, they are a “child with a disability” under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Disclaimer: This is a general statement of the law, not legal advice. Consult your own attorney, because reading this does not create an attorney-client relationship.
I believe you’re posting this because you want the problems fixed; but in order for that to happen, you need to make it happen. There are a variety of escalation strategies to consider: you might go to your state’s secretary of education; you might go to your state’s attorney general; you might go to the press. Note that NDAs usually do not hold up when you’re making accusations of criminal activity, and some of the accusations you have made are criminal in nature. There are “whistleblower protection” laws, which vary from state to state. Also note that if someone is your lawyer, then you have the absolute iron-clad right to tell them everything (“attorney-client privilege”) regardless of what you may have signed. And if what you say is true, then there are probably quite a few groups that would happy to provide you with a lawyer, or lawyers that would work on contingency. In any case, talking to a lawyer should be your next step before taking any major action; it’s just a question of which one.
Your career as an auditor that people pay to evaluate themselves is completely doomed and you should sacrifice it before it explodes. Your career as an auditor that people pay to evaluate others has promise.
Also, you should realize that having a scandal ready to release in a controlled fashion gives you some powers, and you should think carefully about what your objectives are. Depending on the location, size, spin and time of release, you can take out any one person of authority, possibly (but not necessarily) as high as the state governor. If you have political savvy, you might maneuver into a position of authority yourself.
(To all the other commenters in this thread: this is one of those cases where you should be providing actionable options to the original poster, not going meta, not expressing outrage, not trying to collect the information to act in his place. Comment as a consequentialist, not as a conversationalist.)
Pulling a bunch of money out of the system with a lawsuit is not a winning outcome if it leaves the existing corrupt power structure in place. Be warned that for many lawyers, the goal will be money, not improvement. Do not use a lawyer whose goals are different than your own.
You should be collecting evidence. If you are ever alone with an incriminating document, photograph every page. You may later wish to allow these documents a chance to go missing (eg, by making a FOIA request) before you reveal that you’ve copied them. If you are in a state where it is legal to do so without telling anyone, record every interesting conversation. A recorded statement like “the evaluator’s job is to collude with the submitter” is a political instakill if given to the press, and the threat of releasing it is significant leverage.
Pay attention to the specific people involved, especially the ones who are higher up, and the ones who are keeping themselves hidden. Try to figure out who’s good, who’s evil, who’s smart, and who’s dumb. Try to predict how each will react to scandal. Assume that by default, the evildoers will successfully deflect blame onto the stupid, unless you have specific incriminating evidence.
This is good advice in general for dealing with the tort portion of the US legal system. But we shouldn’t forget the general deterrence effect of money damages.
And in education law in particular, money damages for being a negligent educator are essential impossible to get, so the extreme money grubbers aren’t in this market. In special education, money damages simply for having a stupid education plan are unavailable under the most important special education statute.
That said, the rest of this post is excellent advice.
In particular, if any of the children evaluated are in special education, parents have fairly strong leverage to punish school districts who are doing stuff that no one could think would work. Attorneys and non-attorney advocates in all 50 US states are available to help the parents, who often have no idea what their rights are or that the school district is being foolish.
Separately, the American’s with Disabilities Act prohibits retaliation against anyone who acts to protect a disabled individual’s rights. Alas, proving this is a difficult matter. You might consider looking at my post on one way to document verbal statements in writing.
And for clarity, disabled in this context is a broader label than cognitively impaired, blind, or deaf. If a child has a medical condition that impairs their ability to learn, they are a “child with a disability” under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Disclaimer: This is a general statement of the law, not legal advice. Consult your own attorney, because reading this does not create an attorney-client relationship.
.