electronic classroom of tomorrow vs. … wilhelm.pdf · vs. ohio department of education deposition...

ELECTRONIC CLASSROOM OF TOMORROW

vs.

OHIO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Deposition of

John Wilhelm

August 29, 2016

prompt. precise. professio11/ll.

390 S. Washington Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43215

614.460.5000 • 800,229.0675

fax 614.460.5566

www.priohio.com • [email protected]

1· · · · · · ·IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS· · · · · · · · · FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO·2

·3· ·ELECTRONIC CLASSROOM OF· · ·)· · ·TOMORROW,· · · · · · · · · ·)·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)· · · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · · · )·5· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)· · · · · ·vs.· · · · · · · · · ·)· Case No.·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)· 16CV006402· · ·OHIO DEPARTMENT OF· · · · · )·7· ·EDUCATION,· · · · · · · · · )· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)·8· · · · ·Defendant.· · · · · · )

·9

10

11· · · · · · · ·VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

12· · · · · · · · · · ·JOHN WILHELM

13

14· · · · · · · ·Taken at the offices of· · · · · · · · ZEIGER TIGGES & LITTLE LLP15· · · · · 41 South High Street, Suite 3500· · · · · · · · Columbus, Ohio 43215-610316· · · · · · ·on August 29, 2016, at 9:06 a.m.17

18· · · · · · ·Reported by: Rhonda Lawrence

19

20· · · · · · · · · · · · -=0=-

21

22

23

24

�John Wilhelm

PRI Court Reporting, LLC� � � www.priohio.com614.460.5000 or 800.229.0675

�John WilhelmAugust 29, 2016


�

1· ·APPEARANCES:

·2

·3· · · · ·Marion H. Little, Jr.

· · · · · ·ZEIGER TIGGES & LITTLE LLP

·4· · · · ·41 South High Street, Suite 3500

· · · · · ·Columbus, Ohio 43215-6103

·5· · · · ·614.365.4113

· · · · · ·[email protected]

·6

· · · · · · · · on behalf of the Plaintiff.

·7

· · · · · ·Douglas R. Cole

·8· · · · ·ORGAN COLE, LLP

· · · · · ·1330 Dublin Road

·9· · · · ·Columbus, Ohio· 43215

· · · · · ·614.481.0902

10· · · · ·[email protected]

11· · · · · · · on behalf of the Defendant.

12

13

14· ·ALSO PRESENT:

15· · · · Patrick Flaherty, Videographer

· · · · · Brittny Pierson (a.m.)

16· · · · Rick Teeters (p.m.)

17· · · · · · · · · · · · -=0=-

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

·1· · · · · · · · · · ·STIPULATIONS

·2· · · · · · ·It is stipulated by and between

·3· ·counsel for the respective parties that the

·4· ·videotaped deposition of JOHN WILHELM, a Witness

·5· ·herein, called by the Plaintiff under the

·6· ·applicable Rules of Civil Procedure may be taken

·7· ·at this time by the notary pursuant to notice;

·8· ·that said deposition may be reduced to writing

·9· ·in stenotypy by the notary, whose notes

10· ·thereafter may be transcribed out of the

11· ·presence of the witness, and that the proof of

12· ·the official character and qualification of the

13· ·notary is waived.

14· · · · · · · · · · · · -=0=-

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Page 4·1· · · · · · · · ·INDEX OF EXAMINATION·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE·3· ·BY MR. LITTLE:· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·6·4· · · · · · · · · INDEX OF EXHIBITS·5· ·EXHIBIT· · · · · · DESCRIPTION· · · · · · ·PAGE·6· · · 20· · · Funding Agreement· · · · · · · · 63· · · · 35· · · Ohio FTE Review and Community· · 94·7· · · · · · · School Enrollment· · · · 36· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · · 40·8· · · 37· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · · 55· · · · 38· · · Letter from Wilhelm to· · · · · ·61·9· · · · · · · Forster, 8-3-11· · · · 39· · · FTE Review Report Form· · · · · ·6310· · · 42· · · PowerPoint Presentation· · · · · 29· · · · 43· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · ·14511· · · 44· · · Email from Wilhelm to Barnes· · 147· · · · 46· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · ·15612· · · 47· · · Email from Morin· · · · · · · · 164· · · · 50· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · ·20113· · · 56· · · Email from Wilhelm to Lease· · ·204· · · · 58· · · Email from Dewar to Wilhelm· · ·21214· · · 59· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · ·218· · · · 61· · · Email from Loew· · · · · · · · ·21915· · · 67· · · Email from Wilhelm to Teeters· ·223· · · · 68· · · Email from Teeters to Wilhelm· ·22716· · · 69· · · Email from Lowe· · · · · · · · ·230· · · · 70· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · ·23417· · · 79· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · ·235· · · · 83· · · Email chain· · · · · · · · · · ·23818· · · 149· · ·Letter from Borman to· · · · · · 32· · · · · · · · DeTemple19· · · 155· · ·Email from Babal to· · · · · · · 89· · · · · · · · Heitmeyer/Wilhelm20· · · 156· · ·Letter from Pierson to· · · · · 261· · · · · · · · Thompson21· · · · · · · · ·INDEX OF OBJECTIONS22· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE· · · LINE· · ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 10· · · · ·1823· ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 49· · · · ·18· · ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 50· · · · · 124· ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 50· · · · · 8· · ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 50· · · · ·21

Page 5·1· ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 51· · · · ·21

· · ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 53· · · · ·22

·2· ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 57· · · · · 9

· · ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 69· · · · ·10

·3· ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · · 73· · · · ·11

· · ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · ·112· · · · ·21

·4· ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · ·114· · · · ·10


·5· ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · ·116· · · · · 7

· · ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · ·125· · · · · 3





·8· ·Objection by Mr. Cole· · · · · ·159· · · · · 9




10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � � � � � � � � �JOHN WILHELM�2� �being first duly sworn, as hereinafter�3� �certified, deposes and says as follows:�4� � � � � � � � � � �EXAMINATION�5� �BY MR. LITTLE:�6� � � �Q.�Good morning.�My name is Marion Little.�7� �Can you tell us yours?�8� � � �A.�John Wilhelm.�9� � � �Q.�And Mr. Wilhelm, how are you currently10� �employed?11� � � �A.�I'm a part-time area coordinator for the12� �Ohio Department of Education.13� � � �Q.�Have you had your deposition taken14� �before?15� � � �A.�No.16� � � �Q.�Let me begin, then, by sort of outlining17� �the approach so you're comfortable as we proceed18� �today.�I'll ask you a series of questions.19� �It's important that if you don't understand the20� �question that you ask for a clarification.21� �Sometimes I mumble something, so don't be shy22� �about asking for a clarification.23� � � � � �It's important that you verbalize your24� �responses so the court reporter who's sitting

Page 7

�1� �next to your right can make an accurate�2� �recitation of what you're trying to communicate�3� �to us.�4� � � � � �It's also important that you allow me to�5� �finish my question before you begin your answer,�6� �and it's equally important that you be allowed�7� �to finish your answer before I begin my next�8� �question.�If I interrupt you for whatever�9� �reason, please stop and ask for a clarification.10� �Excuse me, please stop and ask to finish your11� �answer.12� � � � � �Likewise, if you need to take a comfort13� �break at any point in time, please let me know14� �and we'll make an appropriate arrangements in15� �that regard.16� � � �A.�Okay.17� � � �Q.�Any questions about the process before18� �we begin?19� � � �A.�No.20� � � �Q.�Did you review any materials in21� �preparing for your deposition?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�And what did you review?24� � � �A.�Just my last FY11 review and the FY16

Page 8

�1� �review.�2� � � �Q.�And what do those materials consist of?�3� � � �A.�The FY11 consists of a form report that�4� �I wrote to ECOT outlining the results of that�5� �FTE review in '11.�And then the first review�6� �from FY16 and the letter that I sent for FY16.�7� � � �Q.�So in addition to the letters that you�8� �would have sent to ECOT, so that I understand�9� �with respect to each of those respective10� �reviews, are there other materials that you11� �would have -- would have fallen in the category12� �of the FYE [sic] '11 review and FYE '16 review?13� � � �A.�I don't understand your question.14� � � �Q.�Sure.�Were there -- for example, did15� �you have a work file or a file that was the16� �documentation that supported the letter that you17� �composed?18� � � �A.�No.19� � � �Q.�Okay.�Other than the letter itself that20� �was sent to ECOT, would there have been anything21� �else that you would have reviewed as part of22� �those materials?23� � � �A.�No.24� � � �Q.�And separate and apart from the two

Page 9

�1� �letters that you would have sent to ECOT with�2� �respect to FYE '11 and '16, were there any other�3� �materials you reviewed in preparing for your�4� �deposition?�5� � � �A.�No.�6� � � �Q.�Now, did you speak to anyone in�7� �preparing for your deposition?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And who did you speak to?10� � � �A.�Legal counsel.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�And was that Mr. Cole?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�Was there anyone else that participated14� �in that discussion?15� � � �A.�No.16� � � �Q.�And for how long did you speak to17� �Mr. Cole?18� � � �A.�I didn't keep track of the time.19� �Probably four hours.20� � � �Q.�Probably spent -- felt like days, but...21� � � � � �And how long -- how recent was that that22� �you spoke to Mr. Cole?23� � � �A.�Last Friday.24� � � �Q.�Okay.�Was that the first time you had

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �spoken to Mr. Cole?�2� � � �A.�No.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�Had you spoken to Mr. Cole on�4� �prior occasions as it related to this case?�5� � � �A.�On the phone.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�So the meeting that occurred last�7� �week for four hours, was that in person?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�And were there any documents you10� �reviewed as part of that preparation?11� � � �A.�That I reviewed?12� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.13� � � �A.�No.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�Or that you were shown?15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�Okay.�And what were you shown during17� �that review?18� � � � � �MR. COLE:�I'm going to object to that19� �and instruct the witness not to answer on work20� �product grounds.21� �BY MR. LITTLE:22� � � �Q.�Can you tell us the number of documents23� �you were shown during your preparation with24� �Mr. Cole?

Page 11

�1� � � �A.�Oh, probably four or five.�2� � � �Q.�Okay.�And other than Mr. Cole, have�3� �there been other individuals you have met with�4� �relating to -- in person, that is -- with�5� �respect to this litigation or your deposition�6� �preparation?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�And who -- who would those be?�9� � � �A.�Diane Lease.10� � � �Q.�And when did you meet with Ms. Lease?11� � � �A.�I wasn't prepared to answer that. I12� �think it was probably three weeks ago.13� � � �Q.�Did you review documents with Ms. Lease?14� � � �A.�No.15� � � �Q.�And for how long did you meet with16� �Ms. Lease?17� � � �A.�I'm going to say 10 minutes, 15 minutes.18� � � �Q.�Was that the first time you had ever met19� �with Ms. Lease?20� � � �A.�In person?21� � � �Q.�Yes.22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�Anyone else that you met with in person,24� �in terms of attorneys, with respect to this case

Page 12

�1� �or your deposition?�2� � � �A.�There was an attorney at -- present at�3� �the final FTE review.�4� � � �Q.�One of Mr. Cole's colleagues?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�Now, you mentioned -- excuse me.�7� � � � � �Other than what you've described for us,�8� �is there anything else you've done to prepare�9� �for your deposition today?10� � � �A.�No, just thinking through the sequence11� �of events.12� � � �Q.�Did you prepare any notes, for example?13� � � �A.�No.14� � � �Q.�Prepare any type of report or summary of15� �your recollections for anyone?16� � � �A.�No.17� � � �Q.�You described yourself as being a18� �part-time area coordinator.�How long have you19� �had that part-time position?20� � � �A.�Since I started with the department in21� �2008.22� � � �Q.�Now, prior to 2008, you had been a -- a23� �long-term school administrator?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 13

�1� � � �Q.�And I take it you had retired from�2� �serving as a school administrator prior to 2008?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�In 2008, actually.�4� � � �Q.�And when you started with ODE in 2008,�5� �was your position at that time area coordinator?�6� � � �A.�Yes.�7� � � �Q.�And have you been responsible for the�8� �same geographical areas since you started with�9� �ODE in 2008?10� � � �A.�No.�There -- no.11� � � �Q.�And how has your areas of responsibility12� �changed since 2008?13� � � �A.�The actual geographic area?14� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.15� � � �A.�We had a couple of extra counties for a16� �few years when they were redistricting the area17� �coordinator, and then we went back to the18� �original ten counties that we had -- that we had19� �been serving when I first started.20� � � �Q.�Is your area assigned any type of21� �designation by a letter or number?22� � � �A.�Region 1.23� � � �Q.�Region 1?24� � � �A.�Uh-huh.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�And you've always been assigned to�2� �Region 1?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�And if I understand your testimony,�5� �during the course of your tenure at ODE, there,�6� �at one point in time, were additional�7� �counties -- excuse me, additional counties added�8� �to Region 1 and then later subtracted?�9� � � �A.�Right.10� � � �Q.�And Region 1 principally covers what11� �geographical area?12� � � �A.�The northwest corner of Ohio.�There are13� �ten counties starting at the Indiana border in14� �the northwest corner as far over as Lucas and15� �then down.�It's just almost a square block. I16� �could probably name them all, but if you can17� �envision the northwest corner of the state.18� � � �Q.�I don't think it will be necessary for19� �you to name them.20� � � �A.�Okay.21� � � �Q.�But I appreciate the offer.22� � � � � �What -- in terms of a part-time23� �position, how much of your time on a weekly24� �basis is dedicated to serving as an area

Page 15

�1� �coordinator?�2� � � �A.�I am supposed to work 1,000 hours a�3� �year.�4� � � �Q.�And I take it that means some weeks it's�5� �40 and some weeks it's substantially less?�6� � � �A.�What I've tried to do, and what I've�7� �been encouraged to do, is work two days one�8� �week, three days the next, or whatever the�9� �schedule would dictate.�There may be weeks10� �you're not needed at all.11� � � �Q.�And as an area coordinator with ODE12� �since 2008, have your job duties remained the13� �same during that entire time period?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�And how would you describe your job16� �duties?17� � � �A.�We assist the traditional public18� �schools, community schools, and nonpublic19� �chartered schools with any financial questions20� �that they have.�We specifically do -- are21� �responsible for the FTE reviews for the22� �community schools and some auxiliary services23� �reviews for the nonpublic schools, and then24� �general answering of questions that might come

Page 16

�1� �up.�2� � � � � �There are several forms that ODE�3� �requires of school districts to complete�4� �regarding special education in foster-placed�5� �students and we assist schools with getting�6� �those forms completed and -- and submitted.�7� � � �Q.�On an annual basis, how many FTE review�8� �for charter schools would you participate in?�9� � � �A.�It varies from year to year.10� � � �Q.�Since 2008, do you have a sense of the11� �gross number of FTE reviews you've conducted for12� �charter schools?13� � � �A.�I'm going to say the average would be14� �about eight per year.15� � � �Q.�And of the eight FTE reviews for charter16� �schools conducted per year since 2008, do you17� �have a sense or a recollection of how many of18� �those would be eSchools?19� � � �A.�In my territory, there are three20� �eSchools.21� � � �Q.�And what are the three eSchools in your22� �territory?23� � � �A.�Ohio Virtual Academy, Findlay Digital,24� �and ECOT.

Page 17

�1� � � �Q.�Has Ohio Virtual Academy been�2� �operational within your district since the�3� �commencement of your employment as an area�4� �coordinator?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�And is the same true for Findlay�7� �Digital?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And since 2008, do you know how many FTE10� �reviews you've conducted of Ohio Virtual11� �Academy?12� � � �A.�One, in 2011 -- 2012.�Excuse me.13� � � �Q.�And since the commencement of your14� �employment with the ODE, how many FTE reviews15� �have you conducted of Findlay Digital?16� � � �A.�Two.17� � � �Q.�And do you recall when those occurred,18� �please?19� � � �A.�Well, they're on the same cycle as -- as20� �ECOT, so '11 and '16.21� � � �Q.�And with respect to ECOT, you would have22� �conducted FTE reviews in 2011 and 2016?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�The auxiliary service review that you

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �referenced as one of your responsibilities as an�2� �area coordinator for the traditional public�3� �schools, can you give us a little bit more�4� �detail about what type of involvement or�5� �services that would encompass?�6� � � �A.�Auxiliary services is money given to�7� �nonpublic school districts, but it flows through�8� �the public school district.�They receive a�9� �per-pupil amount of money, and they have rules10� �that they're supposed to follow as to how they11� �can spend that money.�And so we have a12� �five-year cycle where we go out and review, both13� �with the public school, because they're the ones14� �that are fiscally responsible for managing the15� �money, and the nonpublic school, in how they're16� �using the supplies and equipment that they order17� �from the public school.18� � � � � �There's a second pot of money that comes19� �to the nonpublic schools called mandated20� �administrative cost, and we review strictly with21� �the nonpublic school whether they're doing22� �recordkeeping for that money.23� � � �Q.�You also described your duties including24� �assisting traditional public schools.�Outside

Page 19

�1� �of the work you're doing with respect to the�2� �auxiliary services review, what other ways do�3� �you assist traditional public schools in a -- in�4� �your capacity as a area coordinator?�5� � � �A.�I would say the biggest is the�6� �involvement with the catastrophic cost program,�7� �as far as time commitments, and the SF-6�8� �program.�Both of these are programs that�9� �involve special education students and money10� �that flows back and forth between school11� �districts if a student is attending one district12� �but is a responsibility of another district.13� � � � � �There's paperwork and -- and forms for14� �them to file to make the money flow from one15� �district to another through the state foundation16� �program, and we assist them in -- in making sure17� �they get that taken care of.18� � � �Q.�Outside of FTE reviews, what involvement19� �do you recall having with ECOT since the20� �commencement of your employment with ODE in21� �2008?22� � � �A.�We're always available when they would23� �call with questions about students that a school24� �district might put a flag on in the system and

Page 20

�1� �say this isn't our student, because the money�2� �follows the student in where the district is�3� �located.�4� � � �Q.�And in addition to that example, are�5� �there any other contexts you recall in which you�6� �would have interfaced with ECOT outside an FTE�7� �review context since the start of your�8� �employment in 2008?�9� � � �A.�ECOT files catastrophic costs -- has10� �filed a couple years for catastrophic costs, and11� �I recall assisting them with making sure they12� �got that paperwork in.13� � � �Q.�The -- you made a reference earlier14� �about cycles and you said that Findlay Digital15� �and ECOT were on the same cycle.�Is that the16� �cycle for FTE reviews?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�And would that be, as you understand it,19� �on a five-year cycle?20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�Would you have -- outside of the22� �five-year review, would you have had any23� �involvement in examining the FTE funding being24� �received by ECOT?

Page 21

�1� � � �A.�No.�2� � � �Q.�Now, during the course of 2008 to the�3� �present, have you had the same immediate�4� �supervisor?�5� � � �A.�No.�Ron Heitmeyer was my supervisor�6� �when I first started.�When he retired last�7� �February, technically Abby Dewar -- Alice Dewar,�8� �would have been my supervisor.�She was Ron's�9� �replacement.10� � � �Q.�I'm sorry, what was Abby's last name?11� � � �A.�Dewar, D-E-W-A-R.12� � � �Q.�And Mr. Heitmeyer's position was what,13� �please?14� � � �A.�He was the full-time area coordinator.15� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Just for the record, I think16� �it's Heitmeyer.17� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Heitmeyer?18� � � �A.�H-E-I-T-M-E-Y-E-R.19� � � �Q.�Thank you.20� � � � � �When you say full-time area coordinator,21� �was that for your district or region, or was22� �that -- did he have responsibilities outside of23� �Region 1?24� � � �A.�No, Region 1.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�And Abby -- Abby assumed the role of�2� �full-time area coordinator after Mr. Heitmeyer's�3� �retirement?�4� � � �A.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�Now, you mentioned a moment ago that�6� �Ms. Dewar was your -- was technically your�7� �direct report.�Do you mean to suggest to us�8� �that there's someone else that you report to�9� �today, as well?10� � � �A.�We report to Brian Jones ultimately when11� �we have our bimonthly meetings in Columbus.12� �Bimonthly?�Every-other-month meeting in13� �Columbus.�Brian Jones normally heads those up.14� � � �Q.�And has he always conducted those15� �meetings since 2008?16� � � �A.�No, there's been a series of different17� �people in the department that have been in that18� �role.19� � � �Q.�Do you have -- and I'm sorry, the20� �position Mr. Jones currently occupies?21� � � �A.�I -- I don't know his official title.22� �I'm sorry.23� � � �Q.�Does he -- that's fine.�Does he have24� �responsibility for all full-time area

Page 23

�1� �coordinators, to your knowledge?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And within Region 1, in addition to�4� �yourself and Ms. Dewar, are there any other area�5� �coordinators?�6� � � �A.�In Region 1?�7� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�8� � � �A.�No.�9� � � �Q.�Now, when you conduct an FTE review, do10� �you do that by yourself or do you have the11� �assistance of others?12� � � �A.�Depends on the size of the entity.�If13� �it's a large entity, meaning ECOT or Ohio14� �Virtual, the practice we had was always to try15� �to have four people there, and probably16� �always -- in my mind, we always wanted to have17� �at least three days on the calendar for that.18� � � �Q.�I take it, then, there would be19� �occasions when you would also assist area20� �coordinators from other regions in conducting21� �FTE reviews of larger community schools outside22� �of Region 1?23� � � �A.�That I would help?24� � � �Q.�Yes.

Page 24

�1� � � �A.�No.�2� � � �Q.�So all of the reviews you've handled or�3� �assisted in any capacity have been those in�4� �Region 1?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�Now, physically, ECOT isn't�6� �located in Region 1.�7� � � �Q.�I understand.�So when you would conduct�8� �the ECOT FTE review, you would conduct that at�9� �its offices here in Columbus?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And the three or four other people would12� �join you here in Columbus for that review?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�And the reason that you're conducting15� �the FTE review of ECOT in Columbus, even though16� �that's outside your physical region, is because17� �ECOT's sponsor is located in your region?18� � � �A.�I don't know if that's the reason why.19� �It's always been there.�Was there in 2008.�And20� �I think Ron Heitmeyer and the people he worked21� �with had done it before that.22� � � �Q.�Other than that's the way that it's23� �always been done, no one's ever offered you any24� �other explanation as to why your region conducts

Page 25

�1� �the FTE reviews of ECOT?�2� � � �A.�That's correct.�3� � � �Q.�In the course of your responsibilities,�4� �do you have interaction with Aaron Rausch?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�And -- and what's the frequency in which�7� �you have interaction with Aaron Rausch?�8� � � �A.�Occasionally he will be at one of our�9� �meetings in Columbus.10� � � �Q.�Now, when you started in 2008 as an area11� �coordinator, I take it that you would have, that12� �year, have had FTE reviews of community schools13� �conducted by you?14� � � �A.�In 2008, yes.15� � � �Q.�And that would be, for example, a16� �blended school?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�Now, in terms of the training you've19� �received in order to conduct FTE reviews of20� �community schools, was there materials that were21� �provided to you at the commencement of your22� �employment?23� � � �A.�There was handbooks for things like FTE24� �reviews, the nonpublic, auxiliary, and mobile

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �unit funds, those all have handbooks.�2� � � �Q.�The handbooks -- handbooks you're�3� �referring to for FTE reviews, is that something�4� �you might describe as the FTE handbook?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�In addition to receiving a copy of the�7� �FTE handbook, was there any other information�8� �you would have received at the commencement of�9� �your employment that would instruct or set forth10� �the manner by which you were to conduct FTE11� �reviews?12� � � �A.�Not -- no.�Ron Heitmeyer would have13� �shown me how to do FTE reviews, since I would14� �have had no idea in 2008.�He would have gone15� �with me on several of those.16� � � �Q.�So the only form of written17� �documentation that was provided to you to18� �establish the manner by which you were to19� �conduct the FTE handbook -- or FTE review was20� �the FTE handbook?21� � � �A.�Yes.22� � � �Q.�And is that true during the -- the23� �entirety of your tenure, that the only written24� �materials that have been provided to you to

Page 27

�1� �instruct you on how the FTE review is to be�2� �conducted is the FTE handbook?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�What other written materials were�5� �provided by ODE or any other source that informs�6� �you in any way as to the manner by which FTE�7� �reviews are to be conducted?�8� � � �A.�I recall we received at least one�9� �document from Cody Loew on how to count hours,10� �how we should be looking at those.11� � � �Q.�And Mr. Loew occupies what position,12� �please?13� � � �A.�I think his title is assistant director,14� �and -- and I believe in the division of school15� �finance.16� � � �Q.�Would Mr. Loew sometimes attend your17� �area coordinator meetings?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�Is that the context in which you would20� �have interacted with Mr. Loew?21� � � �A.�Yes.22� � � �Q.�Are there any other contexts in which23� �you would have interacted with Mr. Loew other24� �than the area coordinator meetings?

Page 28

�1� � � �A.�I'm not sure I understand your question.�2� � � �Q.�Sure.�I'll ask a better question,�3� �hopefully.�4� � � � � �Outside of the every-other-month area�5� �coordinator meetings, are there any other�6� �contexts in which you would have interacted with�7� �Mr. Loew?�8� � � �A.�Emails.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�What about in person or -- are10� �there any other contexts in which you would have11� �interacted with him?12� � � �A.�No.13� � � �Q.�Or over the phone, is there any other14� �context in which you would have interacted with15� �him?16� � � �A.�I'm sure I've talked to him on the17� �phone.18� � � �Q.�That's fine.19� � � � � �So you described that Mr. Loew provided20� �some type of documentation on how to count21� �hours.�Was that something you received in22� �calendar year 2016?23� � � �A.�Calendar year 2016.�Yes, I think.24� � � �Q.�And was this document that you received

Page 29

�1� �something that was provided to you during one of�2� �these every-other-month area coordinator�3� �meetings?�4� � � �A.�I believe.�I'm not sure if we had a�5� �special meeting for that or if it was part of�6� �the area coordinator regular meeting.�7� � � �Q.�And the document that Mr. Loew provided�8� �you, did it have a title?�I'm trying to get a�9� �better sense of what was provided to you.10� � � �A.�It was a -- a PowerPoint.11� � � �Q.�Were you given a -- an actual copy of12� �the PowerPoint presentation?13� � � �A.�I don't know if we were given or -- or14� �emailed.�Yes, we would have gotten something.15� � � �Q.�Okay.�So other than -- setting aside16� �the PowerPoint presentation materials given to17� �you by Mr. Loew sometime in 2016, were there any18� �other materials that have been provided to you19� �by the Ohio Department of Education that set20� �forth in writing the manner by which you were to21� �conduct the FTE reviews other than the FTE22� �handbook?23� � � �A.�No.24� � � �Q.�Let me show you what I've marked

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �previously as Plaintiff's Exhibit 42 and ask you�2� �whether that is a copy of the PowerPoint�3� �presentation that Mr. Loew provided you in�4� �calendar year 2016.�5� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Are you -- are you asking him�6� �to verify that that's each and every page, or�7� �what are you asking him to do?�If he generally�8� �recalls, or what?�9� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�We'll see what his answer10� �is to the question.11� � � �A.�This looks familiar.12� � � �Q.�Okay.13� � � �A.�I can't verify every page, but...14� � � �Q.�And that's fine.�Does that look like,15� �best you can tell, the type of material that16� �Mr. Loew provided you in 2016?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�So if we were trying to understand what19� �materials that the Department of Education has20� �provided you to inform you on the manner by21� �which FTE reviews are conducted, we would look22� �at Exhibit 42 and then the FTE handbooks23� �themselves?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 31

�1� � � �Q.�And other than the initial on-the-job�2� �training provided by your immediate supervisor,�3� �has there been any other instruction or guidance�4� �that has been provided to you by the Department�5� �of Education as to the manner to conduct FTE�6� �reviews other than Exhibit 42 and the FTE review�7� �handbooks?�8� � � �A.�I would say yearly when the handbook is�9� �updated we would have discussions in an area10� �coordinator meeting.�I wouldn't classify that11� �as formal training.12� � � �Q.�That is, to the extent there were13� �changes made from an FTE review handbook from14� �one year to the next, those would be identified15� �for you at the area coordinator meeting?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�Any other thing else that would have18� �been provided to you in terms of training other19� �than what you've just described for me?20� � � �A.�No.21� � � �Q.�Prior to commencing your employment with22� �the Department of Education in 2008, had you had23� �any experience with community schools?24� � � �A.�Describe "experience."

Page 32

�1� � � �Q.�Had you ever worked for a community�2� �school?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�Would you have had any involvement in�5� �terms of your official responsibilities as a�6� �school administrator with what I call�7� �traditional public schools in working with any�8� �of the community schools?�9� � � �A.�No.10� � � �Q.�In your capacity as a area coordinator,11� �do you have any individuals that report directly12� �to you?13� � � �A.�No.14� � � �Q.�And your offices are physically housed15� �where?16� � � �A.�In Putnum County Educational Service17� �Center in Ottawa, Ohio.18� � � �Q.�I'm going to hand you what's previously19� �been marked as Defendant's Exhibit 149.20� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Doug, want me to see if I21� �can find you another copy?22� � � � � �MR. COLE:�That's fine.�These are23� �things that have been used before today, I take24� �it?

Page 33

�1� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Yes.�2� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Am I in frame if I lean in?�3� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�No, you're fine.�4� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Oh, I misspoke.�What�5� �number is that on the front of that, Doug,�6� �please?�7� � � � � �MR. COLE:�149.�That's what you said.�8� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�That's Plaintiff's Exhibit�9� �149.�I apologize.10� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Yes.�Isn't that what you11� �said?�I'm sorry.12� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�I think I misspoke.13� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Oh.14� �BY MR. LITTLE:15� � � �Q.�Sir, do you recognize Plaintiff's Ex --16� �or Plaintiff's Exhibit 149?17� � � �A.�I recognize the email cover.18� � � �Q.�And, sir, the email cover is an email19� �that you composed?20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�And it is an email cover that -- excuse22� �me, shows an email that you sent to Mr. Rausch?23� � � �A.�It says to Cody Loew.24� � � �Q.�Excuse me, Cody Loew.�And what is the

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �date of your email?�2� � � �A.�October 30th, 2015.�3� � � �Q.�And what prompted you to send that email�4� �to Mr. Loew?�5� � � �A.�I'm guessing somebody asked us to look�6� �in our files and send everything we have related�7� �to ECOT.�8� � � �Q.�You're guessing.�Do you have a specific�9� �recollection?10� � � �A.�No.11� � � �Q.�And what did you attach to your email12� �that you forwarded to Mr. Loew?13� � � �A.�Looks like a contract.14� � � �Q.�Is that contract entitled "Funding15� �Agreement"?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�And where did you find that document?18� � � �A.�This would have had to have been in our19� �files at the Ottawa office.20� � � �Q.�Do you maintain a physical set of files21� �for ECOT at the Ottawa offices?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�And are -- how are those files labeled24� �or segregated?

Page 35

�1� � � �A.�The files are by year of the FTE review.�2� � � �Q.�So if I looked at 2011, would I find all�3� �the documentation regarding the FTE reviews�4� �conducted that year?�5� � � �A.�For ECOT?�6� � � �Q.�For ECOT.�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�Are the files broken down by ECOT?�9� � � �A.�Yes, by each community school would10� �have --11� � � �Q.�Each community school.12� � � �A.�-- I would have kept a file.13� � � �Q.�And other than keeping an FTE file for a14� �community school for the year in which that FTE15� �review was conducted, do you maintain at the16� �Ottawa offices any other records relating to17� �ECOT?18� � � �A.�Ask me that again.19� � � �Q.�Sure.�I'll ask you a better question.20� � � � � �What files do you maintain at the Ottawa21� �office relating to ECOT?22� � � �A.�Presently, there are none except for23� �this year's FTE review.24� � � �Q.�Were there previously other records that

Page 36

�1� �were maintained at the Ottawa office relating to�2� �ECOT?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�And were those files removed recently?�5� � � �A.�No.�We were asked to send everything we�6� �had in relation to ECOT that was in our files.�7� � � �Q.�And when were you asked to do that?�8� � � �A.�Sometime in the last half a year.�9� � � �Q.�Sometime in calendar year 2016?10� � � �A.�'16.11� � � �Q.�And who asked you to forward all those12� �materials?13� � � �A.�I don't recall if that came from Aaron14� �Rausch or from Cody Loew or both.15� � � �Q.�And do you know to whom you forwarded16� �those materials?17� � � �A.�I would have either forwarded them to18� �Cody or whoever Aaron or Cody said they wanted19� �them forwarded to.20� � � �Q.�And do you recall what records you21� �forwarded at the request of either Mr. Rausch or22� �Mr. Loew?23� � � �A.�Whatever -- whatever we would have had.24� � � �Q.�And what do you think you had that you

Page 37

�1� �forwarded to them?�2� � � �A.�Anything relating to FTE reviews for�3� �both years, when I did the reviews.�4� � � �Q.�So for 2011 and then 2016?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�Would you have had any other records�7� �that you maintained at the Ottawa office�8� �relating to ECOT other than FTE review materials�9� �for 2011 and 2016?10� � � �A.�Well, we obviously had this.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�And that particular exhibit that12� �you're referring to was sent in October of 2015?13� � � �A.�Right.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�Were there any other materials15� �that you retained at the Ottawa office relating16� �to ECOT other than the 2011, 2016 FTE review17� �materials and then what we've marked as18� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 149?19� � � �A.�Ask me that again.�I'm not sure I20� �understand your question.21� � � �Q.�What other materials did you maintain,22� �if any, at the Ottawa office relating to ECOT23� �other than, one, what we've marked as24� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 149 in front of you; two,

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �the materials relating to the 2011 FTE review;�2� �and, three, the materials relating to ECOT's�3� �2016 FTE review?�4� � � �A.�I don't know of any.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�And as to those three categories�6� �of materials that I just described for you, were�7� �those all maintained in a paper format?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�Did you separately have10� �electronic files that you maintained at the11� �Ottawa office relating to ECOT?12� � � �A.�We would have -- I would have tried13� �always to have an electronic file, and then also14� �I would try to copy and put things in a paper15� �file in case for some reason they got lost.16� � � �Q.�Okay.�So your -- your intention was17� �that the paper and electronic file would mirror18� �each other?19� � � �A.�To the best of my ability, yes.20� � � �Q.�Okay.�Sure.�And for the -- the funding21� �agreement that is included as part of22� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 149, from what file did you23� �obtain that document?24� � � �A.�I'm guessing there was a general file

Page 39

�1� �that said ECOT.�2� � � �Q.�Okay.�A general -- so in addition to a�3� �FTE file, sounds like there was more -- there�4� �was also a general file?�5� � � �A.�There must have been, because I wouldn't�6� �have kept something like this in the -- in my�7� �FTE file.�8� � � �Q.�Was there anything in the FTE -- excuse�9� �me, the general file, did it have any contents10� �other than a copy of the ECOT funding agreement?11� � � �A.�I don't recall.12� � � �Q.�Okay.�Was the general file something13� �that you also sent to ODE in the first part of14� �2016 of this year?15� � � �A.�I would have sent everything that we16� �would have had that had ECOT marked on it.17� � � �Q.�Okay.�After you forwarded, in late18� �October 2015, a copy of the ECOT funding19� �agreement to ODE, did anyone from ODE follow up20� �with you regarding that document?21� � � �A.�Follow up regarding which document?22� � � �Q.�The funding agreement that is attached23� �to your email that we've marked as Plaintiff's24� �Exhibit 149.

Page 40

�1� � � �A.�I don't recall that.�2� � � �Q.�Okay.�Prior to the filing of the�3� �lawsuit in this case, do you have a recollection�4� �of anyone at ODE in calendar year 2016 -- and�5� �we'll broaden that to include calendar year�6� �2015 -- speaking to you regarding the funding�7� �agreement?�8� � � �A.�No.�9� � � �Q.�So after you forwarded a copy of the10� �funding agreement in late October to Mr. Loew,11� �if I understand your testimony, no one at ODE12� �subsequently contacted you to inquire about that13� �document in any respect?14� � � �A.�I don't recall that, no.15� � � �Q.�Okay.�Now, with respect to -- you,16� �yourself, had received a copy of that funding17� �agreement in 2011, had you not?18� � � �A.�I -- I don't know that.19� � � �Q.�I'm going to show you what I have marked20� �as Plaintiff's Exhibit 36.�Mr. Wilhelm, I'll21� �represent to you Plaintiff's Exhibit 36 consists22� �of a number of emails, and I'd like to begin by23� �directing your attention to the page that is24� �Bates stamped in the lower right-hand corner

Page 41

�1� �with the number 6371.�2� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�3� � � � � �MR. COLE:�It's the next page, 6371.�4� �There you go.�It's the back there.�5� � � � � �THE WITNESS:�Oh, okay.�6� �BY MR. LITTLE:�7� � � �Q.�And do you see an email at the bottom�8� �from yourself to a number of people dated�9� �January 4, 2011?10� � � �A.�What am I looking for?11� � � �Q.�At the very bottom of the page, sir,12� �there is an email from John Wilhelm sent13� �Tuesday, January 4, 2011, at 3:22 p.m.�Do you14� �see that?15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�And there -- it's sent to Jennifer --17� �and it's B-E-N-T-A-H-I-R.18� � � �A.�Uh-huh.19� � � �Q.�Do you know her?20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�And who is she?22� � � �A.�She used to be the EMIS person for ECOT.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�And then there are a number of24� �people CC'd on the email, one of them being Ron

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �Heitmeyer, your immediate supervisor at that�2� �time; is that correct?�3� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�And then the next person copied is�5� �Robert Miller.�Who is Mr. Miller?�6� � � �A.�Robert Miller was also a part-time�7� �finance office person, worked out of our office.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�Was Mr. Miller going to assist�9� �you in an FTE review --10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�-- of ECOT in 2011?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�And then the next individual listed is14� �James Lambert?15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�And who is Mr. Lambert?17� � � �A.�He is an area coordinator presently out18� �of the Troy office, Region 2.19� � � �Q.�And was Mr. Lambert, at this time, going20� �to assist you in conducting the FTE review of21� �ECOT?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�The email has the subject, "Initial FTE24� �review information."�Do you see that?

Page 43

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�2� � � �Q.�And feel free to look at that email, but�3� �as I understand it, it identifies that this is�4� �the list of the type of information and the�5� �protocol that you're following in conducting a�6� �FTE review of ECOT in 2011?�7� � � �A.�Let me read it here.�8� � � �Q.�Sure.�Take your time.�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�And you had referenced -- well, excuse11� �me.�In paragraph one it says, "We will attempt12� �to arrive at your office no later than 9:00 a.m.13� �on Monday, January 31.�We anticipate having a14� �total of four reviewers.�This should allow us15� �to wrap up by Tuesday afternoon, February 1 at16� �the end of the day."17� � � � � �Do you see that?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�And that's consistent with what you told20� �us earlier, that typically you'd have as many as21� �four individuals assisting you in a review of22� �the magnitude of ECOT?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�And this is the -- a standard type of

Page 44

�1� �letter that you would have sent to a community�2� �school advising as to the processes that you�3� �were going to deploy conducting an FTE review?�4� � � �A.�Normally there would be a form letter�5� �that I would have sent along, as well.�It's�6� �more official.�Not just a -- not just an email�7� �from me, but kind of a standard, this is to�8� �verify that our FTE review will take place on�9� �such and such a date.10� � � �Q.�Okay.�So in addition -- in this case it11� �looks like in addition to the form letter, you12� �would have sent an email outlining some of that13� �same information, as well?14� � � �A.�That's normally what I would do, yes. I15� �would verify -- probably verify on the phone16� �first dates that would work, and then once we17� �had dates, send out the official form letter18� �that says, hey, this is when we're going to come19� �out.�And then if we wanted to follow up or --20� �or needed any other clarification, I would do a21� �less formal email like this.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�Fine.�And then in the middle of23� �that same page, Bates stamped 6371, do you see24� �an email of January 5, 2011, from ECOT to

Page 45

�1� �yourself?�2� � � �A.�January 11th, did you say?�3� � � �Q.�January 5.�4� � � �A.�5.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�It says, "Thanks, John, for�6� �getting this information to me.�It looks like�7� �we'll be able to email you the document and will�8� �do so by Friday, the 7th of January.�I wanted�9� �to make you aware that there is a funding10� �agreement ECOT has with ODE and needed to know11� �if you already have a copy of the agreement or12� �if you will need a copy.�Also, in the printout13� �for the 31st do you want a copy of the entire14� �ECOT population or just the files you will be15� �auditing?"16� � � � � �Do you see that?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�And then just to follow up, then, on the19� �email that is on the first page of Exhibit 36,20� �there's actually two emails there.�One of them21� �is an email at the bottom from yourself back to22� �ECOT dated January 6, 2011, at 1:28 p.m.�Do you23� �see that?24� � � �A.�Yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�"Next week will be okay for sending me�2� �your student information in response to your�3� �original email.�I am unfamiliar with the�4� �funding agreement you're referring to, so you�5� �will need to fill me in on that one."�And then�6� �your paragraph continues.�7� � � � � �And then the email above that from ECOT�8� �to yourself says, "Among other things, I will be�9� �sure to get the funding agreement for you, as10� �well."11� � � � � �Sir, does this email refresh your12� �recollection that with respect to the FTE13� �review, ECOT advised you as to the existence of14� �a funding agreement?15� � � �A.�I don't remember this email, but if I16� �had a copy of the agreement, I would say that's17� �where I got it.18� � � �Q.�Well, in 2011 -- excuse me.�The funding19� �agreement that was contained in your file and20� �maintained at the Ottawa offices, do you believe21� �you received that directly from ECOT?22� � � � � �MR. COLE:�If you recall.23� � � �A.�If I -- I don't recall, but I -- that's24� �the only time I've seen it.

Page 47

�1� � � �Q.�Is there any reason to believe you�2� �received a copy of the funding agreement that�3� �was maintained in your files at the Ottawa�4� �offices from any source other than ECOT?�5� � � �A.�Say that again.�6� � � �Q.�Sure.�With respect to the funding�7� �agreement, which is attached to Plaintiff's�8� �Exhibit 149 and that you indicated had been�9� �maintained in the general ECOT file at your10� �Ottawa offices, are you aware of any other11� �source, other than ECOT, that would have12� �provided you that document?13� � � �A.�No.14� � � �Q.�Now, as a res -- in reaction -- excuse15� �me.16� � � � � �Do you recall having any follow-up17� �beyond what is set forth in the email chain18� �marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 36 with anyone at19� �ECOT regarding the funding agreement?20� � � �A.�No.21� � � �Q.�And when you received the funding22� �agreement from ECOT, did you follow up with23� �anyone at the Ohio Department of Education24� �regarding it in any respect?

Page 48

�1� � � �A.�I don't recall.�2� � � �Q.�And when you say you don't recall, is�3� �that -- is it possible that you did and you just�4� �don't recall today?�5� � � �A.�That's possible.�6� � � �Q.�With respect to any of the community�7� �schools that you've conducted FTE reviews of�8� �since 2008, did any of them, to your knowledge,�9� �have a funding agreement in place with the10� �Department of Education other than ECOT?11� � � �A.�No, not that I'm aware of.12� � � �Q.�And the -- excuse me.�The funding13� �agreement that was maintained in your files in14� �Ottawa relating to ECOT and the Department of15� �Education, do you recall reading that document?16� � � �A.�Yes, I'm sure that I did.�If she sent17� �it to me --18� � � �Q.�Okay.19� � � �A.�-- I'm sure that I did.20� � � �Q.�And -- and you would have reviewed it in21� �2011?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�And you would have reviewed it24� �before the -- before you conducted the FTE

Page 49

�1� �review in 2011?�2� � � �A.�I would -- yes, I would think so.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�And do you recall having any�4� �questions about any of the terms of the funding�5� �agreement?�6� � � �A.�No, I don't -- I mean, I really don't�7� �recall that we reacted much to that.�I don't --�8� �I don't know that it was any different than what�9� �we were doing --10� � � �Q.�Okay.11� � � �A.�-- as far as conducting the review.12� � � �Q.�That is, you believe that the review13� �that ODE was conducting -- excuse me.14� � � � � �You believe that the FTE review that ODE15� �was conducting in 2011 was, from your16� �standpoint, consistent with the funding17� �agreement?18� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Calls for a legal19� �conclusion.20� � � �A.�Ask me the question again.21� � � �Q.�Sure.�You had no reason to believe that22� �the FTE review being conducted by ODE of ECOT in23� �2011 was anything different than what was set24� �forth in the funding agreement itself?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection to form.�2� � � �A.�Ask me again.�3� � � �Q.�Sure.�As you sit here today, do you�4� �have any reason to believe that the FTE review�5� �conducted by ODE of ECOT in 2011 was�6� �inconsistent in any way with the terms of the�7� �funding agreement?�8� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Calls for a legal�9� �conclusion.10� � � �A.�I conducted the review based on an11� �awareness of, at the time, of what we were12� �supposed to do, of what we were looking for in13� �the review in -- in 2011.14� � � �Q.�And when you were provided a copy of the15� �funding agreement in 2011, did you have any16� �reason to believe that the review you were17� �conducting, as you understood the way in which18� �you were supposed to conduct it, was in any way19� �inconsistent with any of the terms of the20� �funding agreement?21� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Calls for a legal22� �conclusion.23� � � �A.�I -- I don't know how to answer that24� �question.

Page 51

�1� � � �Q.�Well, did you -- when you reviewed the�2� �funding agreement, did you say, that sets forth�3� �something different than what I think we're�4� �supposed to do?�5� � � �A.�No.�6� � � �Q.�Did you think, wow, we're violating the�7� �funding agreement in some way?�8� � � �A.�By doing our review?�9� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.10� � � �A.�No.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�So from your perspective, ODE was12� �not violating the funding agreement when it13� �conducted the 2011 review?14� � � �A.�I don't recall paying a lot of attention15� �to the funding agreement.16� � � �Q.�How is it that someone would give you a17� �document -- a legal document entitled "Funding18� �Agreement," tell you that the funding agreement19� �is something that ECOT's relying upon, and you20� �wouldn't have given it any focus?21� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Misstates the22� �testimony.�Are you pointing to something where23� �they said ECOT was relying on something?24� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Yeah.�I already showed him

Page 52

�1� �the emails.�2� �BY MR. LITTLE:�3� � � �Q.�You can answer the question.�4� � � �A.�Ask me the question again.�5� � � �Q.�Sir, you've already identified for us�6� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 36 where ECOT identifies for�7� �you the funding agreement, and you've told us�8� �that you received a copy of the funding�9� �agreement.10� � � �A.�Okay.11� � � �Q.�And I'm trying to find out if someone12� �gives you a legal document, is it your answer13� �that you simply would have ignored it?14� � � �A.�No, I don't think it was inconsistent15� �with what we did -- with what we did in our16� �review.17� � � �Q.�Okay.�That's what --18� � � �A.�But I don't know that I connected the19� �legal document with anything that I didn't20� �already know we were going to be doing or how we21� �were going to be doing it.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�That is, if you thought what you23� �were proposing to do was inconsistent with the24� �legal document, I take it you would have alerted

Page 53

�1� �someone at ODE of that fact?�2� � � �A.�Yes, probably would.�3� � � �Q.�That is, if ECOT was taking a position�4� �or giving you direction that, from your�5� �standpoint, was inconsistent with what you�6� �thought your obligations were as a reviewer, you�7� �would have alerted that to your supervisor,�8� �right?�9� � � �A.�I think if I didn't know whether we10� �should be doing the review, whether we were11� �doing it, I would have certainly had a12� �conversation with Ron Heitmeyer.13� � � �Q.�Not whether you should be doing the14� �review at all, but if -- if you believed ECOT15� �was taking a position about the manner in which16� �the review was being conducted that was17� �inconsistent with what you believed was the18� �manner by -- by which you were instructed to19� �conduct the review by ODE, you certainly would20� �have brought that to your supervisor's21� �attention?22� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection to form.�If you23� �understand the question, you can answer.24� � � �A.�I -- I think if I thought that we were

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �inconsistent, I would have said, what should we�2� �do with this.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�And you have no recollection, as�4� �you sit here today, communicating to your�5� �supervisor at any -- or anyone else at ODE that�6� �you believe that the funding agreement was�7� �inconsistent with the directions you had been�8� �provided by ODE; is that true?�9� � � �A.�That's true.10� � � �Q.�And as you sit here today, you have no11� �recollection of submitting or communicating to12� �your supervisor, or anyone else at ODE, that13� �ECOT was requesting or suggesting that you take14� �any action that was inconsistent with the manner15� �in which you believe you were to conduct the FTE16� �review?17� � � �A.�That's true.18� � � �Q.�Okay.�And that's because when you19� �reviewed the funding agreement when it was20� �provided to you in early 2011, at least from21� �your reading of the document, it was consistent22� �with the manner by which you had been instructed23� �by ODE to conduct the FTE review of ECOT?24� � � �A.�Ask me that one again.

Page 55

�1� � � �Q.�Sure.�In 2011, from your reading of the�2� �funding agreement, the reason you did not bring�3� �anything -- any issue to the attention of your�4� �supervisor is because, from your reading of the�5� �document, you believed it was consistent with�6� �the instructions you had been provided by ODE on�7� �how to conduct the FTE review?�8� � � �A.�Yes, I think that's fair.�9� � � �Q.�Now, would you have provided -- excuse10� �me.�The file that you maintained in your office11� �in Ottawa, the general file containing the12� �funding agreement, what other ODE employees had13� �access to that file?14� � � �A.�Ron Heitmeyer, Rob Miller would have15� �been in that office.16� � � �Q.�And then the electronic file that you17� �maintained that mirrored what was in the paper18� �file, was that accessible from ODE's Columbus19� �office through some type of computer access?20� � � �A.�No.21� � � �Q.�Let me have you look, please, then at22� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 37.�Please take a moment23� �and review that.�Let me know when you've24� �finished your review.

Page 56

�1� � � �A.�Okay.�Okay.�2� � � �Q.�Sir, what is Plaintiff's Exhibit 37?�3� � � �A.�Looks like a clarification we were�4� �making before we did our last review.�5� � � �Q.�Is this a -- does it include a copy of�6� �an FTE review report?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�And this was sent by you to ECOT on or�9� �about April 4, 2011?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And so after the -- the FTE review is --12� �of a community school is typically conducted in13� �two stages; there's an initial review and then14� �there's a final review?15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�And this email includes the17� �correspondence and the specific FTE review18� �report form from the initial review; is that19� �right?20� � � �A.�First review, yes.21� � � �Q.�Now, if we could turn to the page Bates22� �stamped 8263.23� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�And that one's entitled, "FTE Review

Page 57

�1� �Report Form"?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And are you the individual who was�4� �responsible for completing this form?�5� � � �A.�Yes, it looks like mine.�6� � � �Q.�And what was the results of the initial�7� �FTE review of ECOT in 2011 as set forth in your�8� �report here?�9� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�The document10� �speaks for itself.11� � � �A.�What were the results?�I'm not sure I12� �understand your question.13� � � �Q.�Well, you review files and materials as14� �part of the initial FTE review; is that correct?15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�Okay.�And you're able to reach certain17� �conclusions based upon the initial FTE review;18� �is that right?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�And purposes of the FTE review report21� �form is to communicate to the community school22� �what the observations and results were from that23� �initial review --24� � � �A.�Yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�-- is that right?�Okay.�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And what were the results that you�4� �communicated to ECOT by this report of March 30,�5� �2011?�6� � � �A.�We identified five errors for them to�7� �take care of in the file.�This looks like�8� �they -- from the redactions, they were specific�9� �students perhaps that had errors in the file.10� � � �Q.�And so if I understand your report,11� �there would have been over 480 student files12� �selected for this initial review?13� � � �A.�That's what it says, yes.14� � � �Q.�And as a result of that review of those15� �480 student files, it appears there were five16� �student files for which issues were identified?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�And your report sets forth the -- the19� �particular questions that needed to be resolved20� �with respect to those five students?21� � � �A.�Yes.22� � � �Q.�And other than with respect to the five23� �students identified on the FTE review report,24� �then there would not have been any other issues

Page 59

�1� �identified by you and the other reviewers as�2� �part of the initial -- or first review in 2011�3� �for ECOT; is that correct?�4� � � �A.�That's correct.�5� � � �Q.�And then mechanically, once you submit�6� �this report to ECOT, then arrangements were made�7� �to schedule the second portion of the FTE�8� �review?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�And this particular form of report,11� �is -- is that form still used today?12� � � �A.�A -- a variation of it.�I think it's13� �changed a bit over the year, but basically14� �identifying issues and then making15� �recommendations.16� � � �Q.�Okay.17� � � �A.�And in 2011, I would not have sent a18� �letter that regurgitated all of this.�I would19� �have had a form kind of a letter that said20� �attached is the -- is the review report form and21� �that's what you're seeing here.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�And has it always been the case23� �since 2008 that when you've conducted an FTE24� �review of a community school, you've done so in

Page 60

�1� �a format comparable to this?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�Now, you -- you mentioned earlier that�4� �Findlay Digital would have also been reviewed�5� �from an FTE standpoint in 2011?�6� � � �A.�Yes.�7� � � �Q.�And was the same process that you�8� �utilized in conducting the FTE review of ECOT in�9� �2011 used with Findlay Digital?10� � � �A.�Same process meaning two visits?11� � � �Q.�Let's start there, yes.12� � � �A.�Yeah.13� � � �Q.�And was -- were the same type of14� �standards applied to -- in conducting the15� �Findlay Digital FTE review in 2011 that were16� �applied to ECOT in 2011?17� � � �A.�Standard meaning?18� � � �Q.�The manner and methodology by which you19� �verified the FTEs.20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�And for the 2012 FTE review of Ohio22� �Virtual Academy, would you have used the same23� �standards that year for Ohio Virtual Academy24� �that you'd used for Findlay Digital and ECOT in

Page 61

�1� �2011?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�Let me show you what I've marked as�4� �Exhibit 38, please.�5� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Thanks.�6� � � �Q.�Let me know once you've had a chance to�7� �review the exhibit.�8� � � �A.�I've looked at it.�9� � � �Q.�And is Plaintiff's Exhibit 38 a copy of10� �a August 3, 2011, correspondence from you to11� �Jeff Forster at ECOT?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�And this would have set -- been the14� �cover letter that would have accompanied the FTE15� �review report form finalizing the 2011 FTE16� �review of ECOT?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�And this particular letter would have19� �copied the Auditor of the State of Ohio?20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�And is this -- when you provided the --22� �the results of FTE reviews for community23� �schools, did you make it a practice of copying24� �the Auditor of the State of Ohio?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�That was usually the case.�We had�2� �differing directions, as I recall, from one year�3� �to the next over which ones needed to go to the�4� �auditor and which ones didn't.�Now it's, I�5� �think, standard for the last review, the final�6� �review.�At one time we were told to send them�7� �both reviews, and then I think we were told the�8� �auditor doesn't want all those, especially the�9� �initial reviews.�So it's -- it's varied back10� �and forth.�But I think the standard now is that11� �we're supposed to do the last review with the12� �auditor.13� � � �Q.�Was the final review of a community14� �school to be sent to the auditor at all times?15� � � �A.�I think so.16� � � �Q.�Okay.�And then if we look at the first17� �paragraph of your August 3 correspondence, it18� �indicates that you, together with a number of19� �individuals, conducted the FTE review for the20� �2011 fiscal year and found all the original21� �source documentation to be in order with few22� �exceptions.�Please refer to comments, including23� �the FTE review report form, for more details24� �concerning the review specifics.

Page 63

�1� � � � � �Do you see that?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And then if we look at Plaintiff's�4� �Exhibit 39, which I will hand to you, this will�5� �be a copy of the final FTE review report form�6� �for ECOT's 2011 FTE review?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�Now, let me show you what I'm marking --�9� �or have marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 20 for a10� �moment.�This is a copy of the funding agreement11� �that was attached to Plaintiff's Exhibit 149,12� �your email of October 2015.�If I could direct13� �your attention to the second page of that14� �document, which has the Bates stamp ECOT 88 in15� �the lower right-hand corner.16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�And I'd like you to look at heading,18� �"Documentation of Learning Opportunities."19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�And in the middle of that paragraph it21� �says, "For the purpose of an enrollment audit,22� �the school shall maintain in its paper and/or23� �electronic files for each student the following24� �documentation," and then there's A, B, and C.

Page 64

�1� � � � � �Do you see where I'm at?�2� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And A says, "Learning opportunity hours�4� �will be verified by a certified ECOT employee�5� �with appropriate administrative oversight and�6� �documentation that each such employee�7� �understands the significance and implication of�8� �his/her signature."�9� � � � � �Do you see that?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�When you reviewed the ECOT files for FTE12� �purposes in 2011, were such certifications13� �contained in the files?14� � � �A.�I don't recall that, no.15� � � �Q.�Do you recall one way or the other?16� � � �A.�Memory is -- is difficult, but I don't17� �recall seeing certifications like we saw the18� �last time we did the ECOT review this -- this19� �time.20� � � �Q.�And so --21� � � �A.�Where they were signed by teachers.22� � � �Q.�So is it your testimony you're denying23� �that the teacher certifications were contained24� �in the ECOT files in 2011?

Page 65

�1� � � �A.�I don't recall seeing them.�2� � � �Q.�B says, "A record or grades earned or�3� �proficiency test results while a student is at�4� �ECOT."�5� � � � � �Were those records contained in the�6� �files that you reviewed in 2011?�7� � � �A.�Record of grades earned.�I don't recall�8� �that either.�9� � � �Q.�C, "Documentation federally required of10� �special needs students for which the school11� �requests additional funding."12� � � � � �Was that documentation contained in the13� �files?14� � � �A.�I don't -- don't remember.15� � � �Q.�When you conduct a FTE review of a16� �school, do you keep some type of summary or17� �record of the particular materials that you have18� �reviewed?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�And how is -- what's that memorialized21� �in?22� � � �A.�Only as it pertains to what we're23� �looking for.�Normally we are not ever looking24� �at grades in a report -- in a file for students.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�Well, if you wanted to explain to me,�2� �given your lack of recollection, specifically�3� �what you looked at at ECOT in 2011, what�4� �document would you show me?�5� � � �A.�The final report form.�6� � � �Q.�And the final report form --�7� � � � � �MR. COLE:�39.�8� � � �Q.�-- Plaintiff's Exhibit 39, is that going�9� �to itemize for us each of the documents that10� �were reviewed during the course of the 201111� �review?12� � � �A.�It's going to identify what we saw13� �that -- that we thought needed correction.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�So the final review report form15� �identifies, from your perspective, items that16� �needed to be rectified.�But where do you have17� �or what document do you have that summarizes18� �specifically what you looked for -- or looked at19� �in each student's file?20� � � �A.�I don't have -- I don't have a separate21� �document for that.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�Are you aware of any document23� �that you or any of the other reviewers24� �maintained in 2011 that checked -- shows a check

Page 67

�1� �mark or some other type of confirmation of the�2� �specific documents reviewed as part of the 2011�3� �FTE review?�4� � � �A.�No.�5� � � �Q.�Looking back, sir, at Plaintiff's�6� �Exhibit 20, a funding agreement, Section 1 on�7� �the first page, Bates stamped ECOT 87, has a�8� �heading, "Documentation of Enrollment."�9� � � � � �Do you see that?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And in the middle it says, "The school12� �shall maintain in its files records of the13� �following."�It says, "Documentation or evidence14� �of delivery and installation of the computer and15� �all necessary related hardware."16� � � � � �Do you know whether those materials were17� �contained in the files made available by ECOT as18� �part of the 2011 FTE review?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�And they were?21� � � �A.�Yes.22� � � �Q.�And B says, "The successful connection23� �to the school's website, where the student can24� �access electronic curriculum and other

Page 68

�1� �electronic resources offered by the school."�2� � � � � �Do you know whether those type of�3� �records were maintained by ECOT in the student�4� �personnel files that you reviewed as part of the�5� �FTE review in 2011?�6� � � �A.�Yes.�7� � � �Q.�They were included?�8� � � �A.�I think so.�9� � � �Q.�If you could turn to the next page,10� �please.�C says, "Delivery, by any means, of the11� �curriculum and materials necessary to begin12� �education of the student (for each student, ECOT13� �shall retain documentation of the delivery of14� �curriculum materials and the date and mode of15� �delivery)."16� � � � � �Were those type of materials included in17� �the student files that were reviewed as part of18� �the 2011 FTE review?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�And D says, "The completion of the21� �student's first assignment."22� � � � � �Can you tell us whether or not the --23� �that type of documentation was included in the24� �student files reviewed by you as part of the

Page 69

�1� �2011 FTE review?�2� � � �A.�The completion of the student's first�3� �assignment.�I would recall that being whenever�4� �they first logged into the computer.�5� � � �Q.�Is that how, as part of the FTE review�6� �that was being conducted in 2011, you would have�7� �measured the completion of the student's first�8� �assignment?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.11� � � �Q.�You can answer.12� � � �A.�That's the only way we would have13� �started -- when they first started, we would14� �have looked at what their first login date was.15� � � �Q.�As part of the 2011 FTE review, did you16� �look at the documents that are set forth as17� �paragraph 1A, B, C, and D of the funding18� �agreement in determining whether or not the19� �student -- excuse me, ECOT should receive FTE20� �funding for that student?21� � � �A.�For 1A, B, C, and D?22� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.23� � � �A.�Yes, with the exception of D.�I don't24� �recall that we had a specific document from ECOT

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �that said, here's a sample of their first�2� �assignment.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�So as part of the conducting of�4� �the 2011 FTE review, if ECOT had in the�5� �student's file either 1A, 1B, or 1C of the -- as�6� �set forth in the funding agreement, did ECOT�7� �then receive the FTE funding for that student�8� �that year?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�And with respect to Section 2, then, of11� �the FTE funding agreement, I take it that you12� �did not -- as a -- you did not, as a reviewer,13� �as part of this FTE review, specifically look to14� �see whether categories A, B, and C were15� �maintained in any of the files?16� � � �A.�A says, "Learning opportunity hours will17� �be verified by a certificated ECOT employee with18� �appropriate administrative oversight and19� �documentation that each employee understands."20� � � � � �I don't recall seeing that in the file.21� � � �Q.�My question is were you looking for it?22� � � �A.�No.23� � � �Q.�And were you -- with respect to any of24� �the documents set forth in 2A, B, and C, I take

Page 71

�1� �it, therefore, in determining whether or not�2� �ECOT would receive FTE credit for a particular�3� �student, you were not even looking at those�4� �categories of information?�5� � � �A.�We did -- I'm quite certain we did not�6� �look for a record of grades.�7� � � �Q.�Okay.�8� � � �A.�And we did not look or have any�9� �requirement, that we were aware of, of special10� �needs students.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�So then looking back then to12� �Section 1 of the funding agreement, and we're on13� �the -- we're still on the second page though --14� � � �A.�Could I -- excuse me.�Could I go back15� �to -- to the original -- your original question?16� � � �Q.�Sure.17� � � �A.�Document -- item C, 2C, if that -- if18� �that's reading that we were looking at IEPs for19� �students that have handicaps, we would have20� �looked at those.21� � � �Q.�Okay.�Because --22� � � �A.�I'm not sure -- as I read that the first23� �time, I wasn't sure that's what that was24� �referring to.

Page 72

�1� � � �Q.�All right.�I appreciate that�2� �clarification.�And that's because community�3� �schools are entitled to additional funding in�4� �the event of a special needs student?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�And in order for -- as part of an FTE�7� �review, you would have looked to see whether the�8� �appropriate paperwork was in place for a�9� �community school to receive that additional10� �financing --11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�-- or funding?13� � � �A.�We would have been looking specifically14� �if the IEP document was in place, and then if we15� �selected a student that had, as one of our 50016� �students or whatever number we were looking17� �at -- a fair number of students that had18� �identified IEP handicaps, we would match those19� �handicapping conditions up with what the system20� �said that student's handicap was.�So that we21� �would have verified those.22� � � �Q.�So then if we look above paragraph 2 on23� �the second page of the funding agreement,24� �immediately above the start of Section 2 where

Page 73

�1� �it says, "A student shall be considered enrolled�2� �and funding shall begin upon the satisfaction of�3� �one or more of the provisions of this section,"�4� �do you see that?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�And am I to understand that for�7� �the 2011 FTE review that ODE would have�8� �considered a student enrolled and funding would�9� �begin upon satisfaction of either Section 1A, B,10� �or C of the funding agreement?11� � � � � �MR. COLE:�I'm going to object to form.12� �I just want to be clear, you're asking him did13� �he do it because it's in that funding agreement,14� �or are you saying were those the tests?15� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�I don't think you're16� �allowed to make objections other than to form,17� �Doug, the last time I checked with the rules. I18� �think the question is fairly clear.19� �BY MR. LITTLE:20� � � �Q.�If you'd answer the question, please.21� � � �A.�Would you ask it again?22� � � �Q.�Sure.�From what you told me, I23� �understand that for the 2011 FTE review that ODE24� �would have considered a student enrolled at ECOT

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �if any of the items set forth in 1A, B, or C of�2� �the funding agreement were satisfied?�3� � � �A.�Not one of the three.�Would be A, B,�4� �and C.�For example, if they would have been�5� �delivered a computer and we had record of that,�6� �but they never logged in, that would -- they�7� �would not be considered for funding.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�So for the 2011 review, if a�9� �student had received the software and computer10� �and was logged in, then you would have been --11� �you would have viewed them as enrolled?12� � � �A.�Yes, that would be the start date.13� � � �Q.�And if a student was enrolled, using the14� �criteria that is set forth in Section 1 of the15� �funding agreement, then ECOT was entitled to FTE16� �funding for that student provided they had not17� �violated the 105-hour rule?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�Now, as part of the 2011 FTE review, did20� �you or any other area coordinators, to your21� �knowledge, review the durational records; that22� �is, the computer durational records for any of23� �the students?24� � � �A.�No.

Page 75

�1� � � �Q.�And prior to the FTE reviews conducted�2� �in calendar year 2016, was there ever an�3� �occasion in which you or any other area�4� �coordinators, to your knowledge, would have�5� �reviewed durational records for any of the FTE�6� �reviews that you had conducted?�7� � � �A.�That I conducted?�8� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�9� � � �A.�Prior to 2016, you're saying?10� � � �Q.�Yes, please.11� � � �A.�No.12� � � �Q.�And just so we're clear, durational13� �records would be any type of record measuring14� �the time of a student's engagement; is that how15� �you understand the term?16� � � �A.�Yes, where they -- where you could show17� �that they were directly engaged in the learning.18� � � �Q.�Okay.�So was there any effort, to your19� �knowledge, prior to the FTE reviews conducted in20� �2016 for the area coordinators to measure or21� �assess student engagement as part of the FTE22� �review process?23� � � �A.�For?�For electronic schools?24� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.

Page 76

�1� � � �A.�No.�2� � � �Q.�And -- and was there any type of�3� �measurement done of -- excuse me.�Electronic�4� �schools we're referring to as eSchools?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�Were there any type of effort --�7� �efforts undertaken, to your knowledge, by area�8� �coordinators prior to F -- 2016 to measure�9� �student engagement for nonelectronic schools?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And what are you referring to, please?12� � � �A.�There was a discussion the year before13� �about an area coordinator working with a school14� �that was not able to produce duration.15� � � �Q.�Was that something you were personally16� �involved in?17� � � �A.�No.18� � � �Q.�Do you know what school you're referring19� �to?20� � � �A.�You all know which one it is.�I can't21� �remember the name of it.22� � � �Q.�This --23� � � �A.�If you say the name of it, I can verify24� �that that's the one I'm thinking.

Page 77

�1� � � �Q.�Is Provost the name?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And is Provost -- what type -- excuse�4� �me.�What kind of school is Provost?�5� � � �A.�I -- I don't know.�6� � � �Q.�And do you understand -- excuse me.�Do�7� �you have any understanding as to what the�8� �circumstances were that involved an examination�9� �of duration records as it related to Provost?10� � � �A.�Not a -- not a good understanding, no.11� �I mean, we were never briefed on that by anyone12� �at the department, to say this is -- this is13� �what's happening with Provost or this is what's14� �going on there.15� � � �Q.�So anything you heard about Provost was16� �secondhand?17� � � �A.�Secondhand.18� � � �Q.�That is, once you heard secondhand19� �information for Provost, your supervisor, for20� �example, did not advise you, based upon what21� �occurred with Provost in 2015, we need to22� �conduct our FTE reviews in a different --23� �different approach?24� � � �A.�Well, I think that was the general

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �trend, is that -- that when Cody Loew was�2� �instructing us on reviews for '16, that this is�3� �how we're going to be doing them.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�Thank you.�I appreciate that�5� �clarification.�6� � � � � �At no time in 2015 did anyone at ODE,�7� �including Cody Loew, advise you that the FTE�8� �reviews should be conducted in a manner�9� �different than what you historically had done?10� � � �A.�I can't recall -- I can't recall whether11� �that happened or not, and I -- and I'll tell you12� �why.�It's because I knew I didn't have any13� �electronic schools on my docket for '15.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�What you do recall specifically,15� �however, is that it was in the first part of16� �2016 that Mr. Loew advised you that there were17� �going to be some changes done or made on how FTE18� �reviews are conducted?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�And the process that you -- excuse me.21� �The historical approach of not examining22� �durational records or engagement records of23� �eSchools, as part of an FTE review, that's the24� �approach that you followed because that was your

Page 79

�1� �understanding as to the standards set forth in�2� �the FTE manual?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�That is, you didn't believe the�5� �standards set in the FTE manual required you to�6� �review durational records?�7� � � �A.�No, I didn't.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�And -- and prior to 2016, you�9� �have no recollection of anyone at ODE telling10� �you that the standards set forth in the FTE11� �manual should -- excuse me, obligated you to12� �review durational records of eSchools?13� � � �A.�The 2015 manual actually referenced14� �that.15� � � �Q.�Okay.�We're going to go through that.16� � � � � �Did you look at the 2015 manual with17� �respect to durational records for eSchools any18� �time prior to 2016?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�Okay.�So is that the first manual that21� �had any reference to durational records?22� � � �A.�Actually, I think earlier ones had some23� �relation -- or suggested durational records.24� �They were not emphasized.

Page 80

�1� � � �Q.�So irrespective of the particular manual�2� �that we're -- that's in place, I take it, then,�3� �prior to 2016, irrespective of whatever the�4� �manual said, you never viewed it as obligating�5� �you to look at durational records of eSchools�6� �inasmuch as you did not do so?�7� � � �A.�That's correct.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�And irrespective of the�9� �particular manual in place, you did not believe10� �the standards set forth in those manuals11� �obligated you to measure student engagement of12� �eSchool students; is that right, prior to 2016?13� � � �A.�It was -- we didn't do it.14� � � �Q.�Okay.15� � � �A.�I don't know if we were obligated to do16� �it, but we did not do it.17� � � �Q.�You never received any type of18� �admonition or reprimand from a supervisor19� �suggesting you had not conducted the FTE reviews20� �in an appropriate fashion, did you?21� � � �A.�In which -- in which year?22� � � �Q.�Any year.23� � � �A.�No.�I received correction from Cody24� �Loew in 2016 that I should use the letter

Page 81

�1� �instead of the -- the form.�My standard always�2� �was to send a form letter saying, here's your --�3� �attached is the copy of your review and attached�4� �is the -- the report form that you see here.�5� � � �Q.�Yes.�6� � � �A.�Apparently some of the coordinators used�7� �a letter that was much more detailed that�8� �regurgitated this same information in letter�9� �form.�And Cody had said, you know, you need --10� �we all need to be doing this the same, and you11� �want to put the document -- or the information12� �from the report form in the letter that you send13� �instead of the report form.14� � � � � �So I -- that's -- I don't know if -- I15� �don't -- I didn't feel like he was picking on me16� �or anything.�I think he was saying we need to17� �be standard, so you need to do it this way.18� � � �Q.�That is, your understanding that -- is19� �that ODE expects all community schools to be20� �treated in the same fashion?21� � � �A.�Well, he wanted the information that22� �went out to the community schools to be the same23� �kind of document.24� � � �Q.�Did you understand that all the

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �community schools were to be subject to the same�2� �testing standards for FTE reviews?�3� � � �A.�The same testing standards?�4� � � �Q.�Are you aware of any schools -- any�5� �community schools for which there were special�6� �deals cut in terms of the type of documentation�7� �they were to make available?�8� � � �A.�No.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�As far as from your perspective,10� �all the community schools were to be treated11� �uniformly, in the same fashion?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�Did anyone ever suggest that the14� �community schools should not be uniformly15� �treated in terms of how they were being measured16� �and assessed?17� � � �A.�No.18� � � �Q.�And at least when you conducted your FTE19� �reviews, you tried to ensure that you were20� �treating all community schools uniformly and21� �applying the -- the same standards to each?22� � � �A.�Yes, I tried to do that.23� � � �Q.�And no one, prior to 2016, ever24� �suggested or intimated to you that you were

Page 83

�1� �failing to perform your job adequately, did�2� �they?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�And when you conducted FTE�5� �reviews without reviewing durational records or�6� �student engagement records, you still believed�7� �that you were doing your job properly?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And you were doing your job consistent10� �with the directions you had been provided by11� �ODE?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�Now, if I could -- let me show you again14� �what was marked previously as Plaintiff's15� �Exhibit 42.�And you told us Exhibit 42 looked16� �like the PowerPoint presentation presented by17� �Mr. Loew in January 2016?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�And if we could look at the second page20� �of that document.�It says in the middle -- it21� �has a PowerPoint slide and then there has some22� �text underneath it that says, "The first major23� �change focuses on eSchools and requesting24� �computer logs from them."

Page 84

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�2� � � �Q.�And "The second major change focuses on�3� �new requirements for documentation and reviewing�4� �non-computer, non-classroom based learning�5� �opportunities.�This will primarily impact�6� �blended learning schools."�7� � � � � �Do you see that?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And these -- those two text sentences I10� �just read to you relate to what are described as11� �major FTE review manual changes?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�Was it during the course of this14� �PowerPoint presentation that Mr. Loew15� �communicated to you and other area coordinators16� �that as part of the 2016 FTE reviews that ODE17� �would be focusing on eSchools and requesting18� �computer logs from them?19� � � �A.�Not just eSchools.�I think they were20� �talking about issues with blended schools as21� �well.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�And was this the first time that23� �ODE had noted that they were going to have the24� �area managers request computer logs from

Page 85

�1� �community schools?�2� � � �A.�Yes, I think that's -- yes.�I think�3� �there was discussion prior to that, but this was�4� �the first time we saw how that was going to be�5� �done.�6� � � �Q.�And when you say there was discussion�7� �before this, what do you recall there being and�8� �when?�9� � � �A.�Throughout the first half of the year,10� �when they were working on the manual, you would11� �have -- if there was a meeting of the area12� �coordinators and there was any discussion about13� �how FTEs were going to be reviewed or done in a14� �given year, that's the time that that would have15� �been discussed, I would think.16� � � �Q.�And when you say the first half of the17� �year, you mean the first half of the school18� �year?19� � � �A.�Of the school year.20� � � �Q.�Okay.�So sometime September -- post21� �September 2015; is that what you're referring22� �to?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�And would you, yourself, have -- have --

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �have had any involvement in drafting the FTE�2� �manual?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�Do you -- do you know whether the�5� �area coordinators have input in revisions to the�6� �manual?�7� � � �A.�There is a task force made up of area�8� �coordinators that's assigned to different things�9� �and that was -- that's one of the task forces.10� �I was not on that task force.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�Thank you.12� � � � � �So sometime in -- or post September13� �2015, you would have participated in an area14� �coordinator meeting in which the subject of15� �reviewing computer logins for community schools16� �was addressed?17� � � �A.�Say that again.�I'm sorry.18� � � �Q.�Sure.�I'm just trying to get the time19� �frame.20� � � � � �Was it -- was it sometime after21� �September 2015 that you first participated in22� �area coordination meeting -- or coordinator23� �meeting in which the subject of obtaining24� �computer logins from community schools was

Page 87

�1� �discussed?�2� � � �A.�Yes, I think that would be accurate.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�And I take it that, as you�4� �understood it, prior to the FTE reviews�5� �conducted in 2016, you're not aware of any�6� �eSchools that were have -- being requested to�7� �provide login information as part of an FTE�8� �review?�9� � � �A.�Prior to '16?10� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.11� � � �A.�No.12� � � �Q.�And prior to '16, you're not aware of13� �any eSchools that are being -- had been14� �requested by ODE, as part of an FTE review, to15� �provide durational records or student engagement16� �records as part of -- of the review?17� � � �A.�No, other than the one you talked about,18� �Provost.19� � � �Q.�Provost.20� � � �A.�Is Provost an eSchool?21� � � �Q.�Well, I'll have to -- I can't answer the22� �questions for you today.23� � � �A.�Well, I -- I just did not pay a lot of24� �attention to that.

Page 88

�1� � � �Q.�Okay.�What -- what you understood is in�2� �terms of your practice and what you understood�3� �to be the practice of other reviewers is that�4� �you were not looking at login records or�5� �durational records or student engagement records�6� �for students as part of FTE reviews prior to�7� �2016?�8� � � �A.�That's correct.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�And you understood that to be10� �consistent with the department's policy at that11� �point in time?12� � � �A.�It was consistent with what I understood13� �the department's policy to be.14� � � �Q.�Sure.�And no one ever suggested to you15� �that you were acting inconsistent with the16� �department's policy?17� � � �A.�No.18� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Now --19� � � � � �MR. COLE:�It's been almost two hours,20� �Marion.�Is there a good time for a break coming21� �up?22� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Yeah, this is fine.�Let's23� �take a break.24� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Off the record.

Page 89

�1� � � � � �(Recess.)�2� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Back on the record.�3� �BY MR. LITTLE:�4� � � �Q.�Sir, before we took a broke -- a break,�5� �we were looking at Plaintiff's Exhibit 42.�Was�6� �this the first time that the ODE formally�7� �communicated to the area coordinators that the�8� �log on information and student engagement�9� �records were going to be examined?10� � � �A.�I'm not sure it was the first time.11� � � �Q.�You said there had been discussions12� �about issues in the -- after September 2015.13� �I'm trying to find out, to the best of your14� �recollection, when it was that there was15� �actually a decision to move forward with a16� �particular course of action.17� � � �A.�I don't recall that.18� � � �Q.�Now, let me show you what I'm going to19� �marked as Exhibit 154.�I'm going to confirm we20� �don't have 154.�We do.�Strike that.21� � � � � �I'm going to show you what I've marked22� �as Exhibit 155 and ask you whether that is an23� �October 2, 2015, email from Mr. Christopher24� �Babal to, among others, yourself.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�2� � � �Q.�And it says, "I have checked my list and�3� �it looks like ECOT was already listed in your�4� �area, area 1.�I was initially under the same�5� �impression you were that Don/Estelle in area 6�6� �would have to review them."�Let me stop there.�7� � � � � �Do you recall there being any confusion�8� �or issues as to who would conduct the review of�9� �ECOT for 2016?10� � � �A.�No.11� � � �Q.�Do you recall when you were first12� �advised whether there would be an FTE review --13� �or, excuse me, that there would be an FTE review14� �of ECOT being conducted by your offices?15� � � �A.�I'm sorry, could you say that again.16� � � �Q.�Sure.�Do you recall when you were first17� �advised that you were be -- would be conducting18� �an FTE review of ECOT?19� � � �A.�For 2016?20� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.21� � � �A.�I would have had that on my calendar a22� �year before that.�I mean, those -- I keep a23� �spreadsheet so I know which year the five years24� �are for the schools.�And then Chris Babal would

Page 91

�1� �have been in a position, in his position, to --�2� �to kind of coordinate that, verify it, of who�3� �was doing which reviews.�But I keep my own�4� �spreadsheet so I don't forget one.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�The second paragraph says, "As�6� �far as tracking hours, in the attached FTE�7� �manual, Cody found something on page 47 that�8� �should justify the need for us to check logged�9� �hours.�Is that how you read it?"10� � � � � �Do you see what I'm reading?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�And the attachment is entitled, FTE13� �Review and Community School Handbook -- excuse14� �me -- Community School Enrollment Handbook,15� �revised January 5, 2015.�Do you see that?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�And, sir, do you recall there being any18� �response you offered to Mr. Babal in response to19� �his correspondence of October 2nd?20� � � �A.�No.21� � � �Q.�Do you recall whether after receiving22� �the October 2nd, 2015, email you would have23� �reviewed the attachment and simply focused your24� �attention on page 47?

Page 92

�1� � � �A.�47?�No, I don't recall responding to�2� �it.�3� � � �Q.�Do you recall there being an issue that�4� �existed as of October 2nd, 2015, as to trying to�5� �find language in the FTE manual that would�6� �justify the need for ODE to check logged hours?�7� � � �A.�I'm sorry.�Ask me that one more time.�8� � � �Q.�Do you recall there being an issue that�9� �existed as of October 2nd, 2015, as to trying to10� �find language in the FTE manual that would11� �justify the need for ODE to check logged hours?12� � � �A.�No.13� � � �Q.�Irrespective of whether you responded in14� �the email, do you recall responding verbally to15� �any of the points or comments offered by16� �Mr. Babal in his email of October 2nd, 2015?17� � � �A.�No.18� � � �Q.�And, sir, if we could look at page 46 of19� �the manual attached as exhibit -- attached to20� �Exhibit 155 for a moment.21� � � �A.�Okay.22� � � � � �MR. COLE:�I'm sorry, what page was23� �that?24� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�We're going to start at

Page 93

�1� �page 46.�2� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Thank you.�3� �BY MR. LITTLE:�4� � � �Q.�Do you see where we have four headings:�5� �"IEP Records," "Juvenile Detention Center,"�6� �"Kindergarten Enrollment," and then finally�7� �"Non-classroom, Non-computer Learning�8� �Activities"?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�And does the heading "Non-classroom,11� �Non-computer Learning Activities" relate to12� �issues involving correspondence schools?13� � � �A.�I'm going to read the explanation.14� � � �Q.�Sure.�Take your time.15� � � � � � � �(Pause in proceedings.)16� � � �A.�I believe this section is referring to17� �not correspondence schools, but schools that may18� �offer students something not at the school.�For19� �example, if they had them on home study or20� �something.21� � � �Q.�Do you believe this section applies to22� �eSchools?23� � � �A.�It could.24� � � �Q.�Is this the section that you've relied

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �upon in the past in conducting FTE reviews of�2� �eSchools?�3� � � �A.�No.�This is relatively new.�4� � � �Q.�Let me have you take a moment and look�5� �at Plaintiff's Exhibit 35.�The document has the�6� �title, "Ohio FTE Review and Community School�7� �Enrollment, Office of School Finance, January�8� �2016."�Please take a moment and review the�9� �exhibit.10� � � � � � � �(Pause in proceedings.)11� � � �A.�Was there a particular section?12� � � �Q.�Let me first ask you whether that's a13� �copy of an FTE manual you received for 2016 at14� �any point in time.15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�And when did you first receive this17� �document?18� � � �A.�I don't know when.�It would have been19� �whenever they finalized the document and sent it20� �out.21� � � �Q.�Were you given a copy of this in22� �conjunction with Mr. Loew's PowerPoint23� �presentation that impact -- or noted the changes24� �that were being made in measuring durational

Page 95

�1� �records or looking and inspecting durational�2� �records?�3� � � �A.�I -- I'm recollecting this would have�4� �been out before that.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�And if you could turn your�6� �attention to page 338.�Well, let me back up a�7� �second.�8� � � � � �Did you understand that Mr. Loew's�9� �PowerPoint presentation, which outlined the10� �changes in the 2016 FTE manual, would be11� �referring to this particular manual?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�Okay.�And if you could turn to page 1514� �of the exhibit, which has the Bates stamp in the15� �lower right-hand corner of 338.16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�And at the top it says -- I'm sorry.18� �Let's go back to page 14, just so we can follow19� �the headings.20� � � � � �That -- that's a heading on page 14 that21� �says, "eSchool Review"?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�And then if we turn to where we24� �were looking at page 15, the first paragraph

Page 96

�1� �says, "When reviewing an eSchool, the reviewer�2� �shall follow all the review procedure letters in�3� �the FTE review checklist, incorporating these�4� �specific eSchool additions/suggestions," and�5� �then there's a number of items listed on page 15�6� �and 16; is that right?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�And -- and you would have�9� �reviewed this content at some point in time?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�And this is where, consistent12� �with the PowerPoint presentation, it's made13� �clear that the student durational and engagement14� �records are going to be reviewed as part of the15� �FTE review process?16� � � �A.�Say that again.17� � � �Q.�Sure.18� � � �A.�I'm not sure I understand your question.19� � � �Q.�When we looked at the PowerPoint20� �presentation, it identifies that there's going21� �to be changes from past to present, and those22� �changes indicate that there's going to be a23� �focus on enroll -- login records and student24� �engagement records, right?

Page 97

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�2� � � �Q.�Okay.�And the provisions of the 2016�3� �manual that specifically address those subjects�4� �are set forth on page 15 and 16; is that right?�5� � � �A.�I don't know if they're in conjunction�6� �with each other.�You know, they're two�7� �different documents.�8� � � �Q.�Well, I understand they're two different�9� �documents.�I'm trying to find out is the10� �provisions of the 2016 manual that indicate that11� �login records and student engagement records are12� �to be reviewed as part of the FTE review process13� �are set forth, as you understand it, on pages 1514� �and 16 of the 2016 FTE review manual?15� � � �A.�I think the -- the PowerPoint was more16� �of a how -- how-to, because that's -- it could17� �be difficult to determine how you're going to18� �look at those hours and how you're going to come19� �up with a formula, whether they have full-time20� �equivalents.�I guess that's the way I looked at21� �the PowerPoint presentation, as opposed to this.22� � � �Q.�Well, I'm not -- maybe I'm not following23� �your answer, but let me ask a better question.24� � � �A.�Okay.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�The provision of the 2016 FTE review�2� �manual that sets forth the requirement that a�3� �FTE reviewer measure logins and student�4� �engagement is set forth on pages 15 and 16 of�5� �the manual?�6� � � �A.�You said FY15 or '16?�This is '16.�7� � � �Q.�I said '16, I believe.�8� � � �A.�Okay.�I thought you said '15.�9� � � �Q.�The provisions of the 2016 FTE review10� �manual that sets forth the requirements that an11� �FTE reviewer measure login and student12� �engagement is set forth on pages 15 and 16 of13� �the manual?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�And we can agree that pages 15 and 16 of16� �the FTE review manual are new for that year, new17� �for that manual?18� � � �A.�I haven't compared them to the '1519� �manual to see what the changes would be.20� � � �Q.�You never went back and compared the21� �two?22� � � �A.�No, I don't think so.23� � � �Q.�And are you saying that as part of any24� �discussions with -- that occurred at ODE, that

Page 99

�1� �no one would have taken the opportunity to�2� �advise the community coordinators about the�3� �specific changes between the '15 and the '16�4� �manual?�5� � � �A.�We were moved on to the '16 manual until�6� �we were told sometime in January we needed to�7� �use the '15 manual.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�My -- my question was that -- at�9� �any point in time, did ODE take the opportunity10� �to share with you, and others within your peer11� �group, what the specific changes were between12� �the '15 and the '16 manual?13� � � �A.�I -- I don't recall.14� � � �Q.�What you do recall is that it was15� �communicated to you by Mr. Loew that there was,16� �in '16 of the -- for the first time, a17� �requirement that you look at as part of an FTE18� �review, login records and durational records?19� � � �A.�It was the first time they were telling20� �us that that's what we needed to do, yes.21� � � �Q.�Now, a moment ago you indicated that the22� �FTE manual for 2016 you were preparing to use23� �and then you were told to use the 2015 manual?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 100

�1� � � �Q.�And that was communicated to you in�2� �January 2015?�3� � � �A.�I -- I think so.�Because when we first�4� �started scheduling the reviews, I think we were�5� �still using '16 or planning on using '16, and�6� �prior to the ECOT review, we were told to go�7� �back and -- some agreement had been reached and�8� �we were going to be using FY15.�9� � � �Q.�Who -- who advised you of that fact?10� � � �A.�I think that would have been Aaron11� �Rausch.12� � � �Q.�Was that something he would have shared13� �with you at an area coordinator meeting?14� � � �A.�It might have been an area coordinator15� �meeting or because of the timing of all the16� �discussions that were going on, it may have been17� �an email or a phone call.18� � � �Q.�You were told to use the 2015 review19� �manual in conducting the -- you were told to use20� �the 2015 FTE review manual in conducting the FTE21� �reviews of community schools in 2015-2016 school22� �year?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�Do you know whether or not as of January

Page 101

�1� �2016 what we've marked as the 2016 FTE review�2� �manual had been posted and made available to�3� �community schools?�4� � � �A.�Do I know whether it was?�5� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�6� � � �A.�No.�7� � � �Q.�Do you know the manner by which the FTE�8� �review manuals for a partic -- that are marked a�9� �particular year are promulgated or disseminated10� �to community schools?11� � � �A.�No.12� � � �Q.�Is there anything, as part of your job13� �responsibilities, by which schools within your14� �district you take responsibility or ownership15� �for ensuring that they're advised as to what16� �standards they're going to be audited by before17� �the start of the school year?18� � � �A.�No.19� � � �Q.�Did Mr. Rausch or anyone else at ODE20� �explain to you specifically why you were being21� �provided instructions to discontinue using the22� �2016 review manual?23� � � �A.�No.24� � � �Q.�And separate and apart from any

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �communications from Mr. Rausch or any -- anyone�2� �within his offices, was there anyone at ODE�3� �that -- or any other source -- that communicated�4� �to you why there was a change in the particular�5� �manual that would be utilized?�6� � � �A.�No.�Just an awareness that there was�7� �lots of discussion between community schools and�8� �ODE's office.�9� � � �Q.�And -- and what is the -- what awareness10� �did you have in the first quarter 2016?11� � � �A.�Awareness meaning when did I know that12� �that was going on?13� � � �Q.�Well, you -- you indicated in response14� �to a prior question that you had an awareness15� �there were a lot of discussions occurring16� �between community schools and ODE's office.�Let17� �me start first by asking you, how are you aware18� �of those discussions?19� � � �A.�Okay.�Probably coordinator meetings,20� �whenever the coordinator meetings would take21� �place, if there was some confusion about what22� �was going to take place or which one we were23� �going to use.�It seems to me that it all24� �stemmed from my putting together the letter with

Page 103

�1� �ECOT and saying, hey, we're going to be out�2� �there doing this review.�But I -- I can't place�3� �exactly when -- when all that took place, you�4� �know, how -- how quickly they were having�5� �discussions.�6� � � � � �For example, the reviews were scheduled�7� �and then canceled and changed a couple times�8� �because of discussions that I was aware of that�9� �were going on between ECOT and ODE.10� � � �Q.�Well, did you have discussions with11� �anyone at Findlay Digital regarding whether the12� �2015 or the 2016 FTE review manual would be13� �utilized?14� � � �A.�I'm sure I did.15� � � �Q.�And what do you -- who do you recall16� �having such communications with?17� � � �A.�Sandra White.18� � � �Q.�And Ms. White holds what position?19� � � �A.�She's the superintendent for Findlay20� �Digital.21� � � �Q.�And do you recall what you would have22� �communicated to Ms. White in regard as to the23� �manual that was going to be applicable?24� � � �A.�No, only that that's the manual we would

Page 104

�1� �be using.�2� � � �Q.�Do you know -- did she indicate whether�3� �she had a copy of the manual?�4� � � �A.�Of the '15 manual?�5� � � �Q.�Yes.�6� � � �A.�No.�7� � � �Q.�Did she indicate whether she had seen�8� �the 2016 manual?�9� � � �A.�No.10� � � �Q.�Did she -- did the two of you have any11� �communications regarding the 2016 manual?12� � � �A.�No, only my letter would have advised13� �her that there were changes.14� � � �Q.�Changes in what?15� � � �A.�In counting of hours.16� � � �Q.�That you would have advised Ms. White in17� �your cover letter to her about the 2016 FTE18� �review that for the first time there would be a19� �counting of hours?20� � � �A.�I believe so.21� � � �Q.�And would you have had any discussions22� �with anyone at Ohio Virtual Academy regarding23� �whether the 2015 or 2016 manual would be24� �utilized this year?

Page 105

�1� � � �A.�No.�2� � � �Q.�And that's because that particular�3� �institution was not scheduled for an FTE review?�4� � � �A.�That's correct.�5� � � �Q.�Did -- have you had discussions at any�6� �point in time with anyone at Ohio Virtual�7� �Academy about the consideration of login or�8� �durational records?�9� � � �A.�No.10� � � �Q.�And other than advising Ms. White that11� �there would be a counting of hours, did you have12� �any other rec -- recollection of any discussions13� �with her about the subject of durational or14� �online records being considered as part of the15� �FTE review of her school that year?16� � � �A.�No.17� � � �Q.�Did you complete the FTE review of18� �Findlay Digital this year?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�And how many students does Findlay21� �Digital have, roughly?22� � � �A.�Oh, I'm thinking 150, 170.23� � � �Q.�Is that an FTE review that's conducted24� �in one day or --

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�2� � � �Q.�Would you do that by yourself, or did�3� �you have assistance?�4� � � �A.�I did that one by myself.�5� � � �Q.�And when there's 150 to 170 students,�6� �how many files do you actually review?�7� � � �A.�25.�8� � � �Q.�And did Findlay Digital make available�9� �to you durational records?10� � � �A.�They attempted to.11� � � �Q.�What type of records did Findlay Digital12� �attempt to make available to you that relate to13� �duration of student engagement or student14� �engagement in general?15� � � �A.�They had six staff members that came in16� �and they were accessing different learning17� �modules that they said had student information.18� �And Sandra White collected all of those for each19� �student that I had -- of the 25 that I had20� �selected.21� � � �Q.�And did those records document the22� �amount of time that each student spent on a23� �computer during the course of each individual24� �day?

Page 107

�1� � � �A.�That's what she said, yes.�2� � � �Q.�Is that what you concluded?�3� � � �A.�For the ones that had it, yes.�4� � � �Q.�Excuse me?�5� � � �A.�For the students that -- that had it.�6� �11 -- 11 of the 25 students did not have close�7� �to the hours they needed.�8� � � �Q.�And so of the -- setting aside the 11,�9� �the remaining 14 students, did Findlay Digital10� �provide, from your perspective, sufficient11� �documentation reflecting the student spent a12� �sufficient number of time on the computer on a13� �daily basis?14� � � �A.�They provided total hours to me.15� � � �Q.�Total hours encompassing what, please?16� � � �A.�Whatever modules they were working from,17� �identified five or six modules that they had18� �shared with me where the students would have19� �logged hours.20� � � �Q.�And with respect to what they shared21� �with you in terms of total hours, did that22� �satisfy the requirements that you were seeking23� �to apply?24� � � �A.�That's what I reported.

Page 108

�1� � � �Q.�As you reported to your supervisors�2� �that -- or supervisor that the Findlay Digital�3� �had provided sufficient documentation of student�4� �engagement for 14 of the students?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�And did your supervisors agree with you?�7� � � �A.�I don't -- I don't know.�8� � � �Q.�And with respect to the remaining 11�9� �students at Findlay Digital, was there any10� �discussion between you and Findlay Digital11� �representatives as to whether those students had12� �records available from other sources to document13� �their time?14� � � �A.�I recommended to them that -- that they15� �continue to try to gather the information.�It16� �seemed like they were having difficulty17� �accessing some of their documents.18� � � �Q.�And this distinction between the 1119� �students and the 14 students that comprise the20� �total 25, was that as part of your preliminary21� �or your final FTE review?22� � � �A.�Final.23� � � �Q.�And you completed your final FTE review24� �of Findlay Digital when, please?

Page 109

�1� � � �A.�Now you're taxing my memory again.�It�2� �would have been in July, I believe.�3� � � �Q.�And then your report -- your final FTE�4� �report on Findlay Digital would have been�5� �completed when, please?�6� � � �A.�The final report that I did?�7� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�8� � � �A.�I -- I don't know without looking at my�9� �records.10� � � �Q.�Would you have done so at least by11� �today?�It's been completed, right?12� � � �A.�Yes, it's been completed.�I've sent it13� �out to Findlay Digital.14� � � �Q.�And with respect to the 11 students that15� �you've identified as bringing insufficient16� �documentation, did Findlay Digital indicate that17� �they, in the ordinary course, would maintain18� �records that would allow them to extract that19� �data for your review?20� � � �A.�I'm sorry, could you ask me that one21� �again?22� � � �Q.�Sure.�During the course of your23� �discussions with Findlay Digital with respect to24� �the 11 students that you identified as having

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �insufficient documentation, did Findlay Digital�2� �indicate that in the ordinary course, it does�3� �maintain records that would allow them to track�4� �the student engagement on a duration basis?�5� � � �A.�Are you asking me if they have those�6� �records and just couldn't find them?�7� � � �Q.�Let's start there.�8� � � �A.�They didn't indicate that.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�Did they indicate whether those10� �are the type of records they typically maintain?11� � � �A.�No.�Sandra White had indicated when we12� �first started that they would have trouble13� �getting those records together.14� � � �Q.�And would have trouble getting those15� �records together, did she indicate that was true16� �for the entire student population or 25 that you17� �were reviewing?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�That is, the superintendent for Findlay20� �Digital communicated to you that as part of the21� �FTE review, it would be difficult for Findlay22� �Digital to make the documentation available23� �because in the ordinary course, they did not24� �maintain records documenting student engagement?

Page 111

�1� � � �A.�My recollection was that she said they�2� �were working on a program that would collect all�3� �that for them and they would have it ready next�4� �year, but -- but this year was going to be a�5� �task to get all that pulled together on a given�6� �day when I would ask for it.�But they did make�7� �an attempt to do that.�8� � � �Q.�So did the superintendent for Findlay�9� �Digital communicate to you, at least that for10� �the school year 2015-2016, they did not have a11� �program in place that tracked, in the regular12� �course, student durational time?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�And so that was a program they15� �were working on for the 2016-2017 school year?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�And would she have communicated that to18� �you prior to the commencement of the first FTE19� �review for the 2015-2016 school year?20� � � �A.�That they would have difficulty --21� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.22� � � �A.�-- with that?�Yes.23� � � �Q.�Were you made aware of -- through your24� �discussions in these area coordinator

Page 112

�1� �meetings -- whether or not other eSchools were�2� �in a similar situation that had been�3� �communicated to you by Findlay Digital, that�4� �they did not maintain the type of records that�5� �ODE was now seeking as part of the 2016 FTE�6� �review?�7� � � �A.�Was I made aware by other area�8� �coordinators --�9� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.10� � � �A.�-- that other eSchools had difficulty?11� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.12� � � �A.�I think there was a general sense that13� �that was the case.14� � � �Q.�That is, as part of the area coordinator15� �meetings, was there a consensus shared among the16� �coordinators that the eSchools would not have17� �available for the department's review the type18� �of documentation that the ODE was seeking to19� �review for the first time in 2016?20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection; foundation.22� � � � � �You can answer.23� �BY MR. LITTLE:24� � � �Q.�And was it also part of the consensus

Page 113

�1� �that was shared by the area managers at these�2� �meetings that specifically the eSchools that�3� �were going to be subject to FTE reviews did not�4� �have in their possession, as part of the regular�5� �course, records documenting a student's duration�6� �of student engagement online?�7� � � �A.�I don't know if there's consensus. I�8� �mean, we didn't take a vote.�I don't know if�9� �there was consensus.10� � � �Q.�Let me ask a slightly -- a different11� �question.12� � � �A.�Okay.13� � � �Q.�During the area coordinator meetings,14� �was there discussion that the eSchools likely15� �did not have in their possession the type of16� �documentation the department was looking for as17� �part of its 2016 FTE reviews as specifically18� �student engagement records?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�Okay.�And as part of these area21� �coordinator meetings, were there any -- excuse22� �me.�Was there a single eSchool that was23� �identified by any of your peers that was likely24� �to have the type of records that the department

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �was looking for for the first time starting in�2� �2016?�3� � � �A.�No, not that I recall hearing, no.�4� � � �Q.�So was the expectation, then, from the�5� �discussions that occurred in the area�6� �coordinator meetings is that the eSchools that�7� �were being audited in -- for the 2015-2016�8� �school year would, in fact, not have the records�9� �you were looking for?10� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Vague as to the11� �expectation.12� � � �A.�Can you ask me that again?13� � � �Q.�Sure.�Was it the expectation, then,14� �that was shared among the area coordinators that15� �the schools that were going to be subject to the16� �FTE review for the 2015-16 school year, that17� �those schools would likely not have the18� �documentation being sought by F -- by ODE as19� �part of the FTE review process?20� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Same objection.21� � � �A.�Whose expectation are you suggesting?22� � � �Q.�Well, I'll ask it more bluntly.�Sir,23� �when you started the FTE reviews for the24� �eSchools within your district, did you have any

Page 115

�1� �reason to believe that either Findlay Digital or�2� �ECOT maintained in its possession records�3� �tracking the type of data that ECOT was seeking�4� �for the first time in 2016?�5� � � �A.�I expected that they did not.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�And was -- were there any�7� �eSchools that any of your peers communicated�8� �that they thought would have that type of�9� �documentation at an eSchool for 2015-2016 school10� �year?11� � � �A.�I didn't hear that from any of the12� �coordinators.13� � � �Q.�Okay.�So given that it was -- and the14� �fact that it was your expectation that the15� �eSchools would not have this type of data, was16� �that something you shared with your peer group17� �at these meetings?18� � � �A.�I think I would have shared that with19� �Cody Loew.20� � � �Q.�Okay.�Do you recall whether it was also21� �shared at the area coordinator meetings?22� � � �A.�I don't recall specifically.23� � � �Q.�Okay.24� � � �A.�My guess is that it would have been.

Page 116

�1� � � �Q.�That's fine.�Was there any -- or did�2� �any of the area coordinators -- strike that.�3� � � � � �We've been talking about eSchools, but�4� �the new requirements of looking at log on times�5� �and durational records would have also been�6� �applicable to other community schools?�7� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Vague as to the�8� �requirements.�9� � � � � �Go ahead and answer if you understand10� �what he means.11� � � �A.�I could use a repeat on that one.12� � � �Q.�Sure.�So you told us that starting for13� �the 2016 FTE review, there was going to be a14� �requirement that you examine login records and15� �durational records --16� � � �A.�Uh-huh.17� � � �Q.�-- right?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�Those requirements also would have also20� �been applicable to other community schools21� �beyond eSchools?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�And so other than Findlay Digital24� �and ECOT, are there other community schools that

Page 117

�1� �you conducted FTE reviews of in -- for the�2� �2015-2016 school year?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�And who were they?�5� � � �A.�I'm going to give you the ones I can�6� �think of off the top of my head.�7� � � �Q.�Sure.�8� � � �A.�Eagle Academy, Polly Fox, Horizon�9� �Science of Springfield.�There's two of them in10� �Toledo.�There's at least three more.�We did a11� �closing review, FTE review, on Great12� �Expectations.13� � � �Q.�When you say closing, what does that14� �mean?15� � � �A.�It means the school sponsor and the16� �school decided not to reopen, so when that17� �happens, we are asked to go out and do a final18� �FTE review similar to what we would do with the19� �regular final review, but it's just a onetime20� �look at their records.21� � � �Q.�Sure.�Thank you.22� � � �A.�I'm sorry, I'm drawing a blank.�There's23� �at least three other schools I think that I24� �would have done.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�So there were -- not holding you to the�2� �specific number, but roughly seven non-eSchool�3� �community schools that were also audited by you�4� �for 2015-2016 school year?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�And there would have been three�6� �other ones that between Ron Heitmeyer and I, we�7� �did the first review to cover Region 9.�There�8� �was no coordinator in Region 9 the first part of�9� �'16, and so we were asked to also do some of10� �those reviews.11� � � �Q.�So you then have a total for the12� �2015-2016 of ten FT -- FTE reviews of13� �non-eSchool community schools?14� � � �A.�Yes.�Don't hold me to the exact15� �number --16� � � �Q.�Sure.17� � � �A.�-- and then we're good.18� � � �Q.�And with respect to those ten19� �non-eSchool community schools, would you have20� �reviewed durational and login records?21� � � �A.�No.�They -- they wouldn't have22� �durational login records.�They would be -- they23� �would be brick-and-mortar-type schools where the24� �majority of the time the students were expected

Page 119

�1� �to be at the school.�So we would have been�2� �looking at attendance records to see what days�3� �they were there, what days they were not there.�4� � � �Q.�So with respect to those ten community�5� �schools, was the FTE funding based upon�6� �attendance?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�As opposed to student engagement?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�And as part of the FTE review for those11� �ten schools, provided the student didn't violate12� �the 105-hour rule, whether the student was13� �present or engaged did not have a adverse impact14� �in any fashion on the community school's FTE15� �funding; is that right?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�During the area coordinator meetings,18� �was there any pushback or disagreement expressed19� �by any of the area coordinators about the new20� �standards that were being rolled out by ODE?21� � � �A.�Pushback meaning?22� � � �Q.�Well, did -- given that, for example,23� �you understood that the schools with -- that you24� �would be reviewing likely did not have those

Page 120

�1� �type of records that are being asked for by ODE�2� �in the first part of -- for the first time in�3� �2016, did you question or challenge or raise�4� �issues with applying that methodology?�5� � � �A.�I expressed my concern about it.�6� � � �Q.�And what concern did you express?�7� � � �A.�That they wouldn't have that�8� �documentation.�9� � � �Q.�And that's what you shared with Cody10� �Loew?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�Did you share that with Aaron Rausch, as13� �well?14� � � �A.�I -- I would think that I would have. I15� �don't recall specifically.�I'm sure that I16� �would have shared it with Cody Loew.17� � � �Q.�Other than expressing to Mr. Loew that18� �the schools that you would be reviewing that19� �year likely did not have the new documentation,20� �did you express anything else to him about21� �whether that made sense, whether this was right,22� �whether there was fair notice, anything like23� �that?24� � � �A.�Not that I recall.

Page 121

�1� � � �Q.�Was there discussions in any of these�2� �meetings or any other meetings that you�3� �participated in about whether or not there had�4� �been sufficient notice provided by the�5� �Department of Education to the eSchools about�6� �the new standards that were being deployed?�7� � � �A.�Were there discussions within the�8� �coordinators?�9� � � �Q.�Yes.10� � � �A.�I'm sure there were general discussions.11� � � �Q.�And what do you recall?12� � � �A.�Just suggesting that it's -- it's going13� �to be difficult for them to show this14� �information.15� � � �Q.�That is, it's going to be difficult for16� �the eSchools to provide that type of17� �documentation?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�And the reason it was going to be20� �difficult to provide that type of documentation21� �is because eSchools historically had not been22� �reviewed on that process -- on the basis?23� � � �A.�That -- that -- that would be my24� �reasoning for that, yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�Okay.�And was also another reason that�2� �was expressed as to why it was going to be�3� �difficult for the eSchools to comply is that�4� �there had not previously been documentation�5� �promulgated by ODE indicating that type of�6� �record or documentation should be created by the�7� �eSchool?�8� � � �A.�I don't know what documentation the�9� �eSchools had access to.�I mean, as far as what10� �they -- what manuals they had, I don't know.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�Fair enough.�Because again,12� �you -- you weren't responsible for issuing the13� �manuals?14� � � �A.�No, I was not.15� � � �Q.�Okay.�And otherwise weren't responsible16� �for issuing any other type of documentation to17� �the schools within your district as to what the18� �requirements or standards would be -- would be?19� � � �A.�No.�If a school requested a section of20� �the manual or something, occasionally we21� �would -- you know, if they wanted that, we would22� �send that out to them, but, you know, as a -- if23� �your question is as a standard rule do I send24� �the manuals out ahead of time to them, no, I do

Page 123

�1� �not.�2� � � �Q.�And do you have a recollection of any of�3� �the eSchools requesting any portion or provision�4� �of the manuals from you?�5� � � �A.�On occasion they would -- there would be�6� �a particular section if they were working on�7� �proofs of residence or something, a specific�8� �detail within the manual.�I'd say, well, let me�9� �copy off that section so you have it in front of10� �you.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�Did you ever refer any of the12� �schools within your district to any website or13� �other site for obtaining copies of the manual?14� � � �A.�No.15� � � �Q.�Do you know whether or not the FTE16� �review manuals were even posted by ODE on a17� �website?18� � � �A.�My awareness was that they were not.19� � � �Q.�When you expressed to Mr. Loew and20� �others, potentially, that you're concerned that21� �the schools within your district could not22� �comply with these new standards, what response23� �did he offer you?24� � � �A.�I didn't say they couldn't comply. I

Page 124

�1� �expressed my concern that they would have�2� �difficulty, that it would be hard for them.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�Well, when you expressed that to�4� �him, what was his reaction?�5� � � �A.�I think -- I can't tell you exactly how�6� �he would have reacted other than, well,�7� �that's -- that's in -- in the law, they're�8� �supposed to be doing that.�9� � � �Q.�Is that what --10� � � �A.�I mean, that would be my recollection of11� �what he would have said to me.12� � � �Q.�And do you know what Mr. Loew's13� �experience was in conducting FTE reviews?14� � � �A.�No.15� � � �Q.�Did he ever indicate to you he had16� �experience with respect to FTE review issues?17� � � �A.�No.18� � � �Q.�Did you -- from any of your engagements19� �with him, did you draw any conclusions that20� �suggested he had experience in conducting FTE21� �reviews?22� � � �A.�No.23� � � �Q.�Were there other area coordinators that24� �suggested that these new standards should be

Page 125

�1� �deferred until notice is provided to the�2� �eSchools of the new standards?�3� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Object to use of the phrase�4� �the "new standards."�5� � � � � �If you know what he's referring to, go�6� �ahead.�7� � � �A.�Yeah, the standards were there.�I mean,�8� �the ability to look at those documents was there�9� �in the '15 manual.10� � � �Q.�Oh, we're going to go through that this11� �afternoon and I'll test your memory on that.12� � � �A.�Okay.13� � � �Q.�But you told me that it was only in14� �January 2016 that instructions were provided by15� �ODE that login and durational records would be16� �examined; is that right?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�Okay.�So that's what I referred to as19� �the new standards.20� � � �A.�Okay.21� � � �Q.�Was there anyone within the group, to22� �your knowledge, of the area coordinators that23� �suggested that the new standards should be24� �deferred for a year to provide notice or an

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �opportunity to educate the eSchools as to what�2� �the new standards are?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�And in the course of your discussions�5� �with Mr. Loew, whether you expressed it or not,�6� �did -- were you of the view that the eSchools�7� �should be at least provided notice of the�8� �expectations before they were applied?�9� � � �A.�To give notice before I came out there,10� �you mean?11� � � �Q.�No.�My -- my question's more basic.12� � � � � �The 2016 manual was, to your knowledge,13� �first promulgated in January 2016?14� � � �A.�The -- the new standards -- the rules15� �were in the previous manual in '15.16� � � �Q.�The new standards that you've identified17� �for me, sir -- strike that.�Let's go back.18� �I'll make it even more basic.19� � � � � �Prior to January 2016, I think you told20� �me this, but please confirm, that you're not21� �aware of any eSchool, prior to that time, that22� �had been requested to provide online or23� �durational records as part of an FTE review?24� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Misstates his

Page 127

�1� �testimony.�2� � � �A.�I don't -- I don't know that.�3� � � �Q.�Do you -- are you aware of any?�4� � � �A.�I'm not aware of any.�5� � � �Q.�And in the course of any of the�6� �conversations that occurred September 2015�7� �forward with any of your area coordinators or�8� �any of your supervisors, did any one of them�9� �identify a single eSchool that prior to 2016 had10� �been asked to provide login and durational11� �records as part of an FTE review?12� � � �A.�I'm not aware of that.13� � � �Q.�Okay.�No one communicated it to you?14� � � �A.�No.15� � � �Q.�And if I understand your testimony,16� �then, given the fact that there was now going to17� �be a requirement that that type of data be18� �provided, your testimony is you didn't give any19� �thought, if you will, to whether or not it made20� �sense that that rule be applied in the middle of21� �a school year, 2015-2016?22� � � �A.�I expressed some concern.23� � � �Q.�The concern you expressed, was it in the24� �context of, it didn't make sense to apply these

Page 128

�1� �rules for the first time in the middle of a�2� �school year?�3� � � �A.�No, I would have just had concern�4� �that -- that to do this in the middle of a year�5� �with ECOT, and I was going to be responsible to�6� �do ECOT, would be difficult.�7� � � �Q.�Okay.�Difficult because it's true that�8� �you did not have any expectation in the first�9� �part of 2016 that ECOT would have the type of10� �documentation that ODE was now seeking?11� � � �A.�That's a fair assessment.12� � � �Q.�Okay.�And your expectation, then, is13� �that if these new standards were employed, that14� �ECOT would, in fact, not be able to satisfactory15� �the requirements now being imposed by the16� �department?17� � � �A.�That would have been my concern.18� � � �Q.�Okay.�And your concern and expectation,19� �then, and certainly in January 2016, is that the20� �FTE review for ECOT would be, in fact, a21� �negative review?22� � � �A.�Well, I was hoping that it would be23� �otherwise, but --24� � � �Q.�Realistically, you knew it would be

Page 129

�1� �negative?�2� � � �A.�I don't know that I knew it would be�3� �negative.�I had concerns about it --�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�5� � � �A.�-- not going well.�6� � � �Q.�And in terms of it not going well, then�7� �your expectation would be that if this�8� �particular course of action that was being�9� �instituted in January 2016 moved forward, that10� �ECOT would have significant exposure in terms of11� �repayment of funds to the Department of12� �Education?13� � � �A.�I didn't know that, no.14� � � �Q.�You knew that in an FTE review that if15� �adequate documentation is not supplied, that16� �there are financial consequences --17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�-- to a school?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�Okay.�And so if you know that a school21� �doesn't maintain the type of records that you're22� �looking for, that in the ordinary course what23� �you're supposed to do is make a report to your24� �supervisor indicating that the FTE -- that a

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �particular school is not entitled to a certain�2� �level of FTE credits?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�And if a school's not entitled to�5� �the FTE credits, then that school will then have�6� �an obligation to make repayment back to the�7� �Department of Education?�8� � � �A.�I was not at all sure what the�9� �department was going to do with information if10� �they found that that was the case.11� � � �Q.�Have you ever seen a situation where a12� �school who did -- who failed an audit and was13� �found not to -- was found to have received an14� �overpayment, because they're not entitled to all15� �the FTE credits, did not have to repay the funds16� �to the department?17� � � �A.�I really haven't paid attention to that.18� � � �Q.�Okay.�Is that because all of the19� �schools that you've conducted FTE reviews of20� �prior to 2016, in fact, passed their audits?21� � � �A.�I don't know if --22� � � � � �MR. COLE:�I'm going to object to the23� �use of the term audit.24� � � �A.�I don't know if it's a pass/fail --

Page 131

�1� � � �Q.�Have --�2� � � �A.�-- standard.�3� � � �Q.�Have each of the schools that have --�4� �that you audited or reviewed as part of an FTE�5� �review, prior to 2016, provided the�6� �documentation to your satisfaction to support�7� �the FTE credits that school was receiving?�8� � � �A.�Not all.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�And for the schools that did not,10� �were adjustments made, then, in the funding that11� �that school received?12� � � �A.�Yes, if -- if they indeed couldn't find13� �the -- you know, the documentation or they14� �couldn't correct what -- what we had identified.15� � � �Q.�Okay.�So was it always the case in your16� �experience that to the extent a school could not17� �provide sufficient documentation to your18� �satisfaction to support the FTE credit, that19� �there would then be a negative adjustment made20� �to the school's funding as a result of the FTE21� �review?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�And was there ever an exception that you24� �can think of to that rule?

Page 132

�1� � � �A.�I audited a school in Toledo a number of�2� �years ago where I said I couldn't do the audit�3� �and record, or they didn't have sufficient�4� �documentation, and I referred it to ODE. I�5� �don't know what they did with that.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�So as to each of the schools that�7� �you're aware of where there has been a -- an�8� �instance of insufficient documentation to�9� �support the FTE funding, there has been a10� �negative adjustment made in the amount of monies11� �to be paid to the school?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�Okay.�And did anyone suggest in 201614� �there would be any different approach applied in15� �how the FTE reviews are conducted this year?16� � � �A.�In terms of not meeting the standard,17� �you mean?18� � � �Q.�That is, did anyone at ODE suggest that19� �to the extent an eSchool failed to provide20� �sufficient documentation to support the FTE21� �funding -- funding that had been paid or was22� �required, that there would be a different23� �approach followed this year than in the past?24� � � �A.�I'm not aware of that.

Page 133

�1� � � �Q.�Okay.�And so you've proceeded on the�2� �assumption in 2016 that to the extent an eSchool�3� �fails to provide the requisite documentation�4� �being requested by ODE to support the FTEs, then�5� �there will be an adverse financial consequence�6� �for that eSchool?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�And that eSchool will either have to�9� �repay the funds or future distributions to that10� �eSchool will be reduced in the future?11� � � �A.�I'm not sure how they would handle that.12� � � �Q.�You're not familiar with the mechanics13� �of it?14� � � �A.�No, I'm not.15� � � �Q.�What you are familiar with is that to16� �the extent the funding requirements are not17� �satisfied as they're being determined by ODE18� �now, in terms of the documentation required,19� �that the school will have to repay the money in20� �some form?21� � � �A.�I assume so.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�And there's never been any23� �suggestion to you by anyone at ODE that a24� �different approach would be followed?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�Speculation on our part that maybe --�2� �maybe there would be adjustments.�3� � � �Q.�Speculation there would be adjustments?�4� � � �A.�On the part of coordinators, maybe --�5� �maybe there will be adjustments made or some�6� �agreement reached on how we're going to do this.�7� � � �Q.�Has there been a suggestion by any�8� �supervisor or anyone at management at ODE that�9� �they will follow a different approach than what10� �historically has been applied?11� � � �A.�No.12� � � �Q.�And when you conducted, for example, the13� �FTE review of ECOT in March, did you make any14� �preliminary observations as to the financial15� �consequences to ECOT?16� � � �A.�No.17� � � �Q.�Was there anyone you talked to about the18� �financial consequences?19� � � �A.�No.20� � � �Q.�So when you conducted the -- you took21� �the FTE review preliminary results from the22� �first meeting and shared them with your23� �supervisor, your testimony is you didn't have24� �discussions with anyone as to what would happen

Page 135

�1� �with these numbers?�2� � � �A.�No.�3� � � �Q.�No one showed you what the magnitude of�4� �the figures would be?�5� � � �A.�No.�6� � � �Q.�Did you have -- irrespective of what you�7� �shared with anyone, did you, in your -- in your�8� �own mind, come up with any figures?�9� � � �A.�No.10� � � �Q.�And is there a reason you did not -- you11� �did or did not?12� � � �A.�Is there a reason why I did or did not?13� � � �Q.�Yes.14� � � �A.�Speculate on the numbers?15� � � �Q.�Yes.16� � � �A.�No.17� � � �Q.�You, however, knew that from the data18� �that you had collected from the first FTE review19� �at ECOT that it would be a substantial number20� �given the sample you had taken?21� � � �A.�No, I wasn't convinced of that.22� � � �Q.�Is that because you believed ECOT had23� �provided the documentation at the March review24� �that ODE is now seeking for the first time in

Page 136

�1� �January?�2� � � �A.�Well, there was some suggestion from�3� �ECOT that they might be able to gather those�4� �documents, but it would be a monumental task.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�Are you saying that as part of�6� �the review that was conducted in March 2016,�7� �that ECOT did not have available for you the�8� �type of information you were -- the department�9� �was now seeking for the first time in January10� �2016?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�And if they were unable to satisfy those13� �deficiencies, we could agree, then, you14� �understood that ECOT would not be eligible for15� �the FTE funding for those students for which the16� �documentation did not exist?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�And that, in fact, is what's spelled out19� �in the F -- the 2015 FTE manual, is it not?20� � � �A.�What was spelled out?21� � � �Q.�That if you do not have the sufficient22� �funding then you're not entitled to the FTE23� �credit for that particular student.24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 137

�1� � � �Q.�Okay.�So once we know what the�2� �standards are to be applied in conducting the�3� �FTE review, assuming they're uniformly applied�4� �to all eSchools, we should be able to figure out�5� �what the financial consequences are to that�6� �particular school?�7� � � �A.�I would agree.�8� � � �Q.�That is, the fact that you conducted the�9� �FTE review versus one of your peers, it still10� �should be the same result irrespective of who11� �personally is conducting the review?12� � � �A.�If they're -- yes.13� � � �Q.�That is, if in fact the standards set14� �forth in the manual are being uniformly applied15� �by each of the area coordinators, we should have16� �the same result for a particular school based17� �upon a review irrespective of what individual18� �person conducted the review?19� � � �A.�Yes, I would say so.�Except that you're20� �not reviewing all the files, so how you proceed21� �from the fact that you find out that your sample22� �of 500 contained students that didn't have those23� �numbers, I'm not sure how that's dealt with at24� �the department when that's reported.�In other

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �words, I didn't review all the files. I�2� �reviewed 750 files.�3� � � �Q.�And that's because what happens in the�4� �ordinary course is that a sample is taken and�5� �then the results from that sample are then�6� �extrapolated and applied to the entire student�7� �population?�8� � � �A.�I'm not aware of that.�9� � � �Q.�Is that not how it did for the type of10� �analysis you did for Findlay Digital?11� � � �A.�No.12� � � �Q.�You did not have that type of13� �application ever as part of an FTE review?14� � � �A.�I'm not sure I understand what you mean15� �by "application."16� � � �Q.�As part of an FTE review, isn't it true17� �that you never review all of the student files?18� � � �A.�That's true in my case.�I've never19� �reviewed all the student files unless it was a20� �school that had 25 to 30 students --21� � � �Q.�Sure.22� � � �A.�-- you know, then we would -- I would23� �just do them all.24� � � �Q.�So if it's a school that has at least

Page 139

�1� �100 students, it's been your approach, since�2� �you've been conducting FTE reviews, to only�3� �review a sampling of the students?�4� � � �A.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�6� � � �A.�With 100, you would do 25 kids, is the�7� �minimum.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�And -- and what happens in the�9� �case of ECOT, for example, is that with respect10� �to each of the FTE reviews that are conducted,11� �you provide the student identification numbers12� �to ECOT of the -- to identify the sample13� �population?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�Okay.�And that's what you provide to16� �ECOT prior to the conducting of the review in17� �the first instance?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�Okay.�And then based upon those review20� �results, then you're able to communicate to your21� �supervisors what the -- what your perspective is22� �on whether or not there's FTE credits should be23� �paid for those particular sample students?24� � � �A.�Well, what we would report -- what we

Page 140

�1� �were told to report this year was report what�2� �you see, and -- and then that would be�3� �evaluated.�4� � � �Q.�Is that different from what you've done�5� �in the past?�6� � � �A.�Yes.�7� � � �Q.�Okay.�So let's -- let's drill down on�8� �that a bit more.�In the past, share with us�9� �specifically what you would share with your10� �supervisor, based upon the review.11� � � �A.�Well, you would still report what you12� �see, but in the case of -- of these13� �requirements, when -- when asking a question14� �like, well, how -- how are we going to conduct15� �this review when we're only doing 750 students,16� �how's this going to be done, we would say --17� �they'd say to us, well, report what you see and18� �then we'll evaluate that.19� � � �Q.�Well, let's talk about prior to this20� �year, though.21� � � �A.�Okay.22� � � �Q.�What -- what's the report that you would23� �have provided to your supervisor?24� � � �A.�Whatever I found.

Page 141

�1� � � �Q.�Okay.�And would you made -- have made�2� �determinations as part of the review, prior to�3� �this year, as to, one, what you'd found, right?�4� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�5� � � �Q.�And then, two, would it also include�6� �whether or not there would have been an�7� �overpayment on the -- for the FTEs?�8� � � �A.�In small numbers, yeah.�I never ran�9� �across one where I had major findings that --10� �that needed drastic changes.�Most of them were11� �clerical-type things or documents that might be12� �missing, you know, so I don't recall that I ran13� �into many that needed massive change.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�That is, again, historically the15� �FTE reviews you've conducted, the schools tested16� �have been compliant?17� � � �A.�For the most part.18� � � �Q.�Okay.�And the noncompliance issues are19� �matters that were relatively minor or matters20� �that could be resolved?21� � � �A.�Yes.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�So this would be the first year23� �in which you would have issues with FTE reviews24� �in which you have schools that are noncompliant

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �with the new standards promulgated by the�2� �department?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�5� � � �A.�For me.�6� � � �Q.�For you.�And for your -- your peer�7� �group, your other -- your peer group has�8� �expressed to you that the eSchools that are�9� �being audited or reviewed this year as part of10� �FTE review process have been noncompliant with11� �new standards promulgated by the department?12� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Object to "new standards13� �promulgated by the department."14� � � � � �Go ahead and answer if you know what he15� �means.16� � � �A.�I don't know what you mean by my peer17� �group.18� � � �Q.�Other area coordinators.�I -- let me19� �ask a better question.20� � � �A.�Okay.21� � � �Q.�So of the -- how many total districts22� �are there?23� � � �A.�Total regions?24� � � �Q.�Yes.

Page 143

�1� � � �A.�Ten.�2� � � �Q.�Ten regions.�And I think you told us�3� �one of those regions does not have a area�4� �coordinator?�5� � � �A.�They do now.�6� � � �Q.�They do now?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�So we have ten different area�9� �coordinators?10� � � �A.�At least.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�Because some coord -- or some12� �regions have multiple area coordinators?13� � � �A.�Most have multiple area coordinators.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�And so of those area15� �coordinators -- excuse me.16� � � � � �Do you know in total how many eSchools17� �were subject to FTE reviews this year?18� � � �A.�No, I don't.19� � � �Q.�Okay.�Do you receive any type of20� �summary from ODE as to the results of the other21� �eSchools being subjected to an FTE review?22� � � �A.�No.23� � � �Q.�Have there been discussions within24� �the -- by the area managers that you've been a

Page 144

�1� �participant in, whether it's at these�2� �every-other-month meetings or otherwise, about�3� �the performance of the eSchools outside your�4� �region as part of the FTE reviews?�5� � � �A.�This year?�6� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�7� � � �A.�No.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�And so is it your testimony you�9� �don't know whether the other eSchools outside of10� �your region that were subject to FTE reviews11� �successfully produced documents consistent with12� �the new standards promulgated by the department13� �January 2016?14� � � �A.�Am I aware of other schools that didn't15� �meet the standards?16� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.17� � � �A.�No.18� � � �Q.�With respect to the FTE review manuals,19� �the different -- those different ones, do you20� �know whether those are promulgated each year?21� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.22� � � �A.�Whether there's a new one made each23� �year?24� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.

Page 145

�1� � � �A.�I'm thinking there is, with minor�2� �revisions.�3� � � �Q.�Do you maintain copies of the -- the�4� �historical manuals?�5� � � �A.�Not on -- as a general rule, I don't�6� �keep more than the previous year's one.�7� � � �Q.�Okay.�8� � � �A.�Somebody does.�9� � � �Q.�Let me show you what I've marked as --10� �excuse me for a second, let me make sure you're11� �on this -- 43.�Let me know once you've had an12� �opportunity to review this.13� � � �A.�Okay.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�Do you recognize the email that's15� �on the second page of Exhibit 43 as one you16� �received by -- from Mr. Loew on January 27,17� �2016?18� � � �A.�Is my name on that one?19� � � �Q.�It is.�Your name appears --20� � � �A.�On the front part.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�Okay.�And if we look at the second page22� �of the exhibit, there's a number of bullets.�Do23� �you see those?24� � � �A.�Yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�And the bullet -- third bullet from the�2� �bottom says, "The updated FTE review manual is�3� �now available online.�Please communicate the�4� �key changes to eSchools and blended learning�5� �schools that you are reviewing for FY16.�We are�6� �also working with the Office of Quality School�7� �Choice to contact sponsors and schools."�8� � � � � �Do you see that?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�Okay.�And the FTE review manual there11� �that is referenced is the 2016 manual?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�And based upon the directions provided14� �by Mr. Loew, did you contact eSchools and15� �blended learning schools to advise of the16� �changes?17� � � �A.�This -- this was in January.�It would18� �have been the time we would start writing the19� �letters and scheduling the meetings.20� � � �Q.�Okay.�Does that mean -- does that mean21� �you contacted them to advise them of the changes22� �that were -- were occurred in terms of what is23� �being reviewed?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 147

�1� � � �Q.�And were all your communications of�2� �these changes in writing or were those done�3� �orally, as well?�4� � � �A.�I think that when I did ECOT and Findlay�5� �Digital, I would have -- when I sent them their�6� �letter, I would have identified those -- the big�7� �change that I saw, which would have been the�8� �documentation needs.�9� � � �Q.�What are you referring to?10� � � �A.�I'm referring to the fact that they11� �needed to show hours.12� � � �Q.�Okay.�Sort of what we had seen in13� �Mr. Loew's PowerPoint presentation; is that what14� �you're referring to?15� � � �A.�I'm referring to the sections -- is it I16� �through G or H? -- that I pointed out to them17� �were new requirements, or that were going to be18� �reviewed.19� � � �Q.�Let me show you what I've marked as20� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 44.�The question's going to21� �be, do you recognize Plaintiff's Exhibit 44 as22� �an email that you sent on January 27, 2016, to23� �Ms. Barnes at ECOT?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 148

�1� � � �Q.�And you would have sent this in response�2� �to the directions you received by Mr. Cody [sic]�3� �on that same date, January 27, 2016?�4� � � �A.�Yeah, I would think so.�5� � � �Q.�And it says, "I am attaching some�6� �information that you will need for the upcoming�7� �review including the letter verifying the dates�8� �and documents that we will be looking at.�9� � � � � �"At your earliest convenience, could you10� �forward to me the following documents11� �electronically:"12� � � � � �And then there's 1, 2 and 3 listed13� �there; is that right?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�The copy of the contract with your16� �sponsor that's referenced as item number 3, do17� �you typically, as an FTE reviewer, review the18� �sponsor contract with the eSchool?19� � � �A.�In the last few years, I think that's20� �been something we were told to do.21� � � �Q.�Okay.�And what do you review that22� �contract for?23� � � �A.�Just to see what it says about the24� �attendance and about the -- you know, how

Page 149

�1� �they're conducting the program.�Just a general�2� �review.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�4� � � �A.�To make sure we have an understanding of�5� �what kind of school it is and what they're�6� �trying to do.�7� � � �Q.�Okay.�Under item number 3 it says,�8� �"Additionally, I wanted to call your attention�9� �to items I-K in the attached letter.�This10� �represents additional information that was not11� �reviewed five years ago that is now required in12� �our review process."13� � � � � �Do you see that?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�And if we could then turn to the second16� �page of Exhibit 44, would this have been also17� �materials that you provided to ECOT on January18� �27, 2016?19� � � �A.�Is this -- you're saying is this what I20� �sent them?21� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�And items I through K --24� � � �A.�Yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�-- those are -- those are the new items�2� �that are being reviewed for the first time?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�These are the items that ODE made the�5� �decision to review for the first time in January�6� �of 2016?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�And are you aware of any communication�9� �prior to your letter of January 27, 2016, to10� �ECOT that the documentation that is set forth in11� �items I through K of this summary would be12� �reviewed as part of the F -- 2015-2016 FTE13� �review?14� � � �A.�I don't -- I didn't -- I didn't make any15� �other communications to them prior to that.16� � � �Q.�Okay.�And are you aware of any other17� �communications from ODE to ECOT prior to January18� �27, 2016, advising or communicating that this19� �type of documentation would be reviewed as part20� �of an FTE review process?21� � � �A.�No.22� � � �Q.�And the items that are set there -- set23� �forth in items I through K as set forth in this24� �January 27, 2016, correspondence, those are the

Page 151

�1� �documentations that we would generally describe�2� �as student computer and durational records?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�Or records reflecting specific student�5� �engagement?�6� � � �A.�Yes.�7� � � �Q.�And was this same form of letter then�8� �sent by you to Findlay Digital?�9� � � �A.�I -- I think so, yes.10� � � �Q.�And -- and with respect to the online11� �schools -- or, excuse me, eSchools that are12� �going to be audited for school year 2016-2017,13� �you already know which schools those are within14� �your district?15� � � �A.�From my list, yeah.16� � � �Q.�Yes.�And if I understand it, there's17� �only one other school -- eSchool in your18� �district or region?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�Okay.�And is that school scheduled to21� �be reviewed this year?22� � � �A.�This coming year, yes.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�And have you already advised Ohio24� �Virtual Academy of these new changes?

Page 152

�1� � � �A.�No.�2� � � �Q.�And, I'm sorry, what's the size, from a�3� �ballpark standpoint, of Ohio Virtual Academy in�4� �terms of student population?�5� � � �A.�It's very similar to ECOT.�I think�6� �maybe a slight bit smaller.�15 -- I want to say�7� �thirteen to fifteen thousand.�8� � � �Q.�Is there an FTE manual in place for the�9� �2016-2017 school year?10� � � �A.�I don't know.11� � � �Q.�Have you been asked to participate in12� �any way in the creation of an FTE manual that13� �would be applicable for the 2016-2017 school14� �year?15� � � �A.�No.16� � � �Q.�And then how do you know whether Ohio17� �Virtual Academy -- strike that.18� � � � � �Do you know what standards will be19� �applied to Ohio Virtual Academy for school year20� �2016-2017 in conducting the FTE review?21� � � �A.�No.22� � � �Q.�And do you have any sense as to when23� �either you or any of the eSchools being subject24� �to FTE reviews in -- for school year 2016-2017

Page 153

�1� �would be advised of the applicable standards for�2� �the review?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�And on what basis would you have, then,�5� �an expectation Ohio Virtual Academy will�6� �maintain certain records in the first half of�7� �the 2016-2017 school year if they have not been�8� �advised as to what the standards will be?�9� � � �A.�I -- I can't answer that.�I don't know.10� � � �Q.�With respect to Ohio Virtual Academy,11� �have you had any discussions with any of that12� �school's representatives in 2015-2016 time frame13� �regarding the department's expectations for14� �records?15� � � �A.�Not that I recall, no.16� � � �Q.�And when you've conducted FTE reviews of17� �Ohio Virtual Academy in the past -- I guess it's18� �only been one prior occasion; is that right?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�I think you told us you would not have21� �looked at any type of student engagement22� �records?23� � � �A.�That's correct.24� � � �Q.�Or computer durational records?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�That's correct.�2� � � �Q.�Do you know whether or not Ohio Virtual�3� �Academy maintains those -- that type of�4� �documentation?�5� � � �A.�I don't know.�6� � � �Q.�If you'd look, then, at the last page of�7� �Exhibit 44.�Can you tell us what that page is,�8� �please?�9� � � �A.�This -- this -- this one you're10� �referring to?11� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�The one with Bates stamp12� �5076.13� � � �A.�Okay.�These are the directions for a14� �school to use to get into the FTE detail report,15� �and that's where they could pull off all of the16� �students and see start and end dates.�And17� �that's what we would work from then when we're18� �doing the review, is that report with selected19� �students pulled out.20� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Okay.�Okay.�Let's take a21� �break here, because we're going to start some22� �new exhibits after this.23� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Off the record.24

Page 155

�1� � � � � � � � � � � � -=O=-�2� � � � � �Thereupon, the luncheon recess was taken�3� �at 12:21 p.m.�4� � � � � � � � � � � � -=O=-�5� � � � � � � � � � AUGUST 29, 2016�6� � � � � � � � � � MONDAY AFTERNOON SESSION�7� � � � � � � � � � 1:25 P.M.�8� � � � � � � � � � � � -=O=-�9� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Back on the record.10� �BY MR. LITTLE:11� � � �Q.�Sir, let me show you what we previously12� �looked at earlier and was marked as Plaintiff's13� �Exhibit 149, your October 2015 email to Mr. Loew14� �containing the funding agreement.�And we looked15� �at some emails earlier today in which ECOT16� �reflected their disclosure of the funding17� �agreement to you as part of the 2011 FTE review.18� � � � � �And my question is:�Did -- do you19� �recall having any specific communications20� �with -- that is, verbally, with anyone at ECOT21� �regarding the funding agreement at that time?22� � � �A.�No, I don't.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�And do you recall at any point in24� �time having any specific verbal communications

Page 156

�1� �with ECOT regarding the funding agreement at any�2� �other dates?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�And so if I understand your testimony,�5� �at no point in time, as you recall it, did you�6� �communicate to ECOT that you believe the funding�7� �agreement to be inapplicable to the 2011 review?�8� � � �A.�To be inapplicable?�9� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.10� � � �A.�No.11� � � �Q.�That is, you did not communicate that?12� � � �A.�No.�That we weren't -- that we weren't13� �following that, you mean?14� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.15� � � �A.�No.16� � � �Q.�Let me make sure we're using -- you17� �never communicated to ECOT, is it true, that you18� �viewed the 2000 -- excuse me, you viewed the19� �funding agreement as being inapplicable to the20� �2011 FTE review; that's correct?21� � � �A.�I don't recall ever doing that, no.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�All right.�We were chatting23� �before the break regarding some of the initial24� �communications sent out in January 2016

Page 157

�1� �regarding the FTE review that would be conducted�2� �that year.�3� � � � � �And if I could please have you take a�4� �look at what I'm going to mark as Plaintiff's�5� �Exhibit 46.�Take a moment and familiarize�6� �yourself with the exhibit and then let me know�7� �when you're finished.�8� � � �A.�Okay.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�If I could have you look at the10� �February 12th, 2016, email -- excuse me, letter11� �that starts at ECOT 3377 on this document.�You12� �see a correspondence from Mr. Loew to Rick13� �Teeters?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�And have you seen this letter before?16� � � �A.�I don't know.�I don't recall.17� � � �Q.�If you could look at the first paragraph18� �of Mr. Loew's letter.�See if this refreshes19� �your recollection at all.�It says, "On January20� �27, 2016, area coordinator John Wilhelm emailed21� �ECOT to confirm the initial FTE review meeting22� �for February 22nd, 2016."23� � � � � �And I believe we looked at earlier24� �Exhibit 44.�I'll show that to you again.�So

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �certainly what Mr. Loew said in the first�2� �sentence of his correspondence of February 12,�3� �2016, would be accurate from your -- your�4� �perspective; is that right?�5� � � �A.�The first paragraph is accurate, meaning�6� �that's what happened, or --�7� � � �Q.�No, first sentence.�8� � � �A.�First sentence.�9� � � �Q.�On January 27, 2016, you --10� � � �A.�Oh, based on this letter?11� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�And that email contained an attachment14� �that outlined the documentation and materials15� �necessary for the initial FTE review meeting.16� �That's right, as well?17� � � �A.�Contained the attachment, which would be18� �this?19� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�Mr. Loew also says in his letter, "In22� �addition, the email highlighted documentation23� �requirements in place for the FY16 FTE review24� �that were not in place five years ago when ECOT

Page 159

�1� �last received an FTE review."�2� � � � � �That statement, from your perspective,�3� �would be true?�4� � � �A.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�Now, it says, the nonclassroom-based�6� �learning opportunities have been in the statute.�7� � � � � �Do you know what he's referring to�8� �there?�9� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Foundation.10� � � �A.�The nonclassroom-based learning11� �opportunities have been in the statute.�I don't12� �know.13� � � �Q.�Okay.�And then it further provides in14� �this correspondence, "While ODE is now reviewing15� �additional documentation, this is consistent16� �with the statutory requirement for eSchools to17� �maintain documentation for both internet18� �instruction as well as non-classroom based19� �learning opportunities."20� � � � � �Do you know what statutory requirements21� �are being referred to there?22� � � �A.�No.23� � � �Q.�Have you had the occasion or necessity24� �to review any of the statutes that impact FTE

Page 160

�1� �funding for eSchools?�2� � � �A.�No.�3� � � �Q.�As part of your responsibilities at ODE,�4� �do you have the occasion to review statutes --�5� �statutes that impact your job?�6� � � �A.�Yes.�7� � � �Q.�Okay.�And what statutes have you�8� �reviewed?�9� � � �A.�For any of my job?10� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.11� � � �A.�Statutes regarding auxiliary services12� �seems to come up quite a bit.13� � � �Q.�Okay.�Have you had to review at any14� �point in time the Ohio statutes relating to15� �funding of eSchools?16� � � �A.�No.17� � � �Q.�If you could look, please, at the next18� �paragraph of Mr. Loew's letter.�It says, "On19� �February 2nd, 2016, area coordinator John20� �Wilhelm was notified by you that ECOT had21� �concerns regarding the ability to successfully22� �run the FY16 detail FTE report and the process23� �to compare and verify FTEs based on documented24� �learning opportunities in the FTE review

Page 161

�1� �manual."�2� � � � � �Do you see that?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�Do you have a recollection of having a�5� �conversation on or about February 2nd, 2016,�6� �with Rick Teeters?�7� � � �A.�Either a phone conversation or an email.�8� �I'm not sure which.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�And can you relate to us, to the10� �best of your recollection, what that11� �communication was?12� � � �A.�I think that he said he's having trouble13� �running the FTE review report.14� � � �Q.�And did he also, as set forth in15� �Mr. Loew's letter, express to you concerns about16� �the ability to verify or provide a document of17� �learning opportunities in the manner that is now18� �being requested by Department of Education?19� � � �A.�Yes, I think he did.20� � � �Q.�And do you have a recollection of21� �anything else that was communicated to you by22� �Mr. Teeters at that time?23� � � �A.�No.24� � � �Q.�And do you recall what, if any, response

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �that you might have offered Mr. Teeters at that�2� �time?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�Do you recall whether or not ECOT made a�5� �request that it be permitted to speak to anyone�6� �at Department of Education regarding the�7� �imposition of these new standards?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And what do you recall being10� �communicated?11� � � �A.�I just recall part of the discussion12� �that I would have relayed to -- to Cody Loew,13� �you know, to say that there's concerns.14� � � �Q.�And you had referenced earlier that you15� �had had discussions with Mr. Loew about16� �concerns.�Was this an example of what you were17� �talking about?18� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Vague.19� � � �A.�Is my concerns about Rick's concerns?20� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.21� � � �A.�I would have -- I'm sure I would have22� �passed that along to Cody and would have asked23� �them to reply.24� � � �Q.�Okay.�Is there something you're

Page 163

�1� �familiar with -- excuse me.�2� � � � � �Are you familiar with the phrase "desk�3� �audit"?�4� � � �A.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�And what's a desk audit?�6� � � �A.�A desk audit is a final review audit�7� �where you can look at all of the FTE detail�8� �report and the SOES report, and if there are no�9� �errors in that SOES report or no outstanding10� �issues or flags with other schools, where you11� �could do a review over the phone as opposed to12� �going out to the school and physically doing a13� �final review.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�If I could have you look at the15� �second page of Mr. Loew's letter of Jan -- of,16� �excuse me, February 12th.�And if you look at17� �the bold language that reads, "FTE review manual18� �documented learning opportunity requirements."19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�It says, "The recent FTE review manual21� �enhancements help ODE to verify that eSchool22� �FTEs are properly reported and calculated23� �correctly based on the required minimum 92024� �hours of documented learning opportunities.

Page 164

�1� � � � � �"As a result, area coordinators will�2� �request computer records for all eSchool�3� �students (in Excel format) that include the�4� �following two elements:�One, student SSID�5� �numbers and, two, total amount of verified time�6� �a student was logged into the online system."�7� � � � � �Sir, the reference there to recent FTE�8� �review manual, do you know that -- whether�9� �that's in reference to the 2016 review manual?10� � � �A.�I do not.11� � � �Q.�Was the -- had the 2016 review manual12� �been withdrawn as of February 2016?13� � � �A.�I don't recall.14� � � �Q.�What was the manner by which it was15� �communicated to you that ODE was not going to16� �utilize the 2016 FTE manual?17� � � �A.�I believe we got either a call or an18� �email from Aaron Rausch to say that we were19� �going to use the '15 manual.20� � � �Q.�Let me have you look at Plaintiff's21� �Exhibit 47 for a moment, please.�You're not22� �copied on this exhibit, but I'm just curious23� �whether the time frame of that refreshes your24� �recollection in any way as to the timing in

Page 165

�1� �which the 2016 manual was being withdrawn.�2� �Please review the document to yourself.�3� � � �A.�Okay.�4� � � �Q.�Does that refresh your recollection from�5� �a time standpoint?�6� � � �A.�Well, apparently Apryl had that�7� �information on February 17th.�8� � � �Q.�I'm just trying to find out whether --�9� �what you recall.�We'll have a separate10� �opportunity to speak to Apryl.11� � � � � �Does this give you any greater guidance12� �as you sit here today as to when the 2016 manual13� �was withdrawn?14� � � �A.�No.15� � � �Q.�Now, the 2016 manual which we looked at16� �earlier today -- excuse me.�Let me find it.17� � � � � �MR. COLE:�It was in there.�Maybe it's18� �in here.�Here it is.19� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Thank you, Doug.20� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Do you want him to have it?21� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Yes, please.22� �BY MR. LITTLE:23� � � �Q.�Which we looked at at Exhibit 35.24� � � �A.�Yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�And we looked specifically at the�2� �language found on pages 15 and 16 regarding the�3� �material that are going to be reviewed as part�4� �of an eSchool review --�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�-- remember that?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�Now, after the 2016 manual was�9� �withdrawn, is it fair to say that the10� �documentation set forth on pages 15 and 16 of11� �the 2016 manual were still included as part of12� �the FTE review conducted for years '15-'16 -- or13� �school year '15-'16?14� � � �A.�You're saying was this the same review15� �that was conducted for '16 -- or for -- yes, for16� �'16?17� � � �Q.�Let me ask a better question.18� � � � � �When you're referring to FTE review '16,19� �you're referring to the review for the school20� �year '15-'16; is that correct?21� � � �A.�Yes.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�So even though the FTE manual23� �for -- or the 2016 FTE review manual was24� �withdrawn, the same requirements that are

Page 167

�1� �memorialized at page 15 and 16 of that manual�2� �were applied for the 2016 FTE examinations; is�3� �that right?�4� � � �A.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�And, in fact, with the withdrawal of the�6� �2016 review manual, were there any changes that�7� �were made to you or discussed with you on how�8� �the FTE review -- review should be conducted for�9� �2016?10� � � �A.�No.�Just said to refer to the '1511� �manual is what I would recall.12� � � �Q.�But as I understand it, what your -- if13� �I understand it, you -- your -- whatever you14� �were supposed to do in the 2016 FTE manual you15� �went ahead and did under the 2015 FTE manual?16� � � �A.�They were -- the requirements were the17� �same.18� � � �Q.�Well, I'll highlight those for you19� �later.20� � � �A.�Okay.21� � � �Q.�But the language that is -- what was22� �identified as the new changes in the 2016 FTE23� �manual were, in fact, simply applied by you and24� �the other area coordinators, to your -- your

Page 168

�1� �understanding, as part of the 2006 FT -- 2016�2� �FTE reviews?�3� � � �A.�We used the language in '15, which�4� �didn't change any of the requirements for�5� �looking at hours.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�So your testimony today is what�7� �we see in the 2016 manual in terms of language�8� �about review of hours is the same thing that was�9� �in the 2015 manual; is that your testimony?10� � � �A.�That's -- that's the way I read it.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�And you're basing that -- if we12� �could look, then, at Exhibit 34, which is the13� �FTE manual for 2015.�I'll hand that to you.14� � � � � �Are you basing that on the checklist15� �that is found on page 24 of the manual?16� � � �A.�Let me take a look at it.17� � � �Q.�Sure.18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�Okay.�So if we're looking at the 201520� �FTE manual which we've marked as Exhibit 34, the21� �position you've taken that that manual allows22� �a -- a review of the durational time for the23� �students or a student engagement is found on24� �page 24 in Section 11 of the checklist; is that

Page 169

�1� �right?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And is it true that this checklist�4� �containing that language first appeared in the�5� �2015 FTE manual?�6� � � �A.�There's always been a checklist.�It�7� �wouldn't have been this checklist.�8� � � �Q.�Sure.�The checklist that -- and let me�9� �draw your attention on page 24.�Looking at the10� �checklist that specifically says, "J, if the11� �student has non-computer learning opportunities12� �are such opportunities documented and approved13� �in writing by a teacher, supervisor, or school14� �administrator."�Then there's, "Yes, no, N/A."15� � � � � �And then K, "Was there16� �hourly/daily/weekly/accounting of hours in which17� �the student accessed learning opportunities?18� �Yes/no."19� � � � � �Do you see that?20� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�Those two items, were they ever present22� �in any checklist prior to the 2015 FTE manual?23� � � �A.�I don't know.�I didn't research that.24� � � �Q.�And if I understand from what you've

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �told me, you wouldn't have conducted a FTE�2� �review in 2015 in which you would have applied�3� �this checklist to an eSchool?�4� � � �A.�I didn't do any eSchools in '15.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�Was there any other provision of�6� �the 2015 FTE manual that, from your perspective,�7� �supported the view that ODE could review the�8� �duration or student engagement records?�9� � � � � �MR. COLE:�I'm going to note this is a10� �63-page document.�Do you want him to go through11� �it, you mean, or what?12� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�I'm just asking him based13� �upon his understanding.�He's the one that14� �referenced it earlier.15� �BY MR. LITTLE:16� � � �Q.�And, sir, you're welcome to look at the17� �document, but my question is pretty basic.�You18� �testified earlier that the manual included the19� �right for ODE to review these type of records.20� � � � � �My question was, is the basis for that21� �contention found in this checklist or was there22� �something else in the manual you were thinking23� �of or referencing in your prior testimony?24� � � �A.�I would have referenced what's on the

Page 171

�1� �checklist.�2� � � �Q.�Okay.�Now -- and do you have a�3� �recollection whether prior to the filing of this�4� �lawsuit you were aware of items J and K of --�5� �strike that.�6� � � � � �Prior to January 2016, were you aware of�7� �items J and K as set forth on this checklist�8� �included in the 2015 FTE manual?�9� � � �A.�Was I aware of them?�I don't recall.10� � � �Q.�Was there any occasion you can think of11� �prior to January 2016 in which you would have12� �had the necessity or the occasion, as you13� �recall, to look at items J and K on page 24 of14� �the 2015 FTE manual inasmuch as you were not15� �conducting an FTE review of an eSchool in that16� �year?17� � � �A.�No, I don't -- I don't think I would18� �have had a need for those.19� � � �Q.�So was it in 2016, after the 201620� �manual -- FTE manual was withdrawn that you were21� �first made aware of or become aware of items J22� �and K of the 2015 FTE manual at page 24?23� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection.�Asked and24� �answered.

Page 172

�1� � � �A.�I don't understand your question.�2� � � �Q.�Sure.�After the withdrawal of the 2006�3� �FT -- 2016 FTE manual, was that the first time�4� �you became aware of subparagraph J and K as�5� �reflected on page 24 of the 2015 FTE manual?�6� � � �A.�I can't say that I would agree with�7� �that.�I would say it's the first time I went�8� �back to review those and make sure that we were�9� �doing what was supposed to be done in '15, using10� �the '15 manual.11� � � �Q.�After the withdrawal of the 2016 FTE12� �manual, did Mr. Loew advise you that it was his13� �perspective that you could look at durational14� �and login records on -- with the use of the 201515� �manual?16� � � �A.�That was my understanding.17� � � �Q.�And was it Mr. Loew that at that time18� �would have pointed your attention to J and K on19� �page 24 of the 2015 FTE manual?20� � � �A.�I don't recall whether that was coming21� �directly from him.22� � � �Q.�Was there anyone else at ODE that23� �communicated to you that it was their24� �perspective in the first quarter 2016 that items

Page 173

�1� �J and K of the checklist found on page 24 of the�2� �2015 FTE manual supported ODE's right to review�3� �and inspect durational or login records?�4� � � �A.�That would have been my assumption.�5� � � �Q.�Well, my -- I'm sorry, my question, was�6� �there anyone else that communicated that?�7� � � �A.�Oh, in the department?�8� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�9� � � �A.�No, I don't -- I don't recall.10� � � �Q.�And so as you sit here today, the only11� �person you can think though -- think of that12� �would have advised you in the first quarter of13� �2016 that page 24, items J and K of the 2015 FTE14� �manual permitted ODE to review durational and/or15� �login records would have been Mr. Loew?16� � � �A.�That would be my guess, yes.�I don't17� �recall specific conversation, but he would have18� �been the one that would have been advising us on19� �the FTE review, so...20� � � �Q.�Did Mr. Loew express to you his21� �expectation -- strike that.22� � � � � �After withdrawal of the 2016 manual,23� �Mr. Loew expressed to you either in -- by an24� �email or verbally that it was his expectation

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �that you would apply the 2015 FTE manual in�2� �conducting the 2016 FTE reviews?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�And that you would apply that 2015 FTE�5� �manual to each of the community schools that you�6� �were auditing during that time period?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�And was this the only documentation that�9� �Mr. Loew or anyone else at the Department of10� �Education provided to you -- provided to you to11� �set forth the manner by which these FTE reviews12� �would be conducted in 20 --13� � � �A.�'15 -- oh, I'm sorry.14� � � �Q.�Sure.�Let me ask it again because --15� �was the 2015 FTE manual the only documentation,16� �then, that was provided to you by anyone at the17� �Department of Education that would set forth the18� �manner by which you were to conduct the 2016 FTE19� �reviews?20� � � �A.�The other one we looked at earlier would21� �also, the PowerPoint.22� � � �Q.�The PowerPoint presentation?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�That related originally to the 2016 FTE

Page 175

�1� �manual?�2� � � �A.�Right.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�So between the PowerPoint and�4� �then the 2015 FTE manual, those were the -- the�5� �two types of documents that were provided to you�6� �by the Department of Education that would set�7� �forth the approach and methodology for you to�8� �conduct the 2016 FTE reviews?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�Now, were there any other communications11� �you had with anyone at ECOT regarding the review12� �that conduct -- was conducted in March other13� �than the initial email correspondence to ECOT14� �setting forth that these new requirements are15� �going to be reviewed and then your conversation16� �with Mr. Teeters that you've already shared with17� �us?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�What other communications do you recall20� �having with anyone at ECOT?21� � � �A.�I think I talked with Rick a couple of22� �times on the phone, Rick Teeters, and we also --23� �Abby Dewar and I also made a trip there to meet24� �Rick, because I had not met Rick yet.�And just

Page 176

�1� �to go over the process to make sure that we�2� �didn't waste time once we got there and were�3� �ready to work when we got there with the�4� �documents.�5� � � �Q.�Was this Abby Dewar's first --�6� � � �A.�Alice Dewar is her official name.�7� � � �Q.�Alice.�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�Thank you.�Was this Alice10� �Dewar's first FTE review?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�Do you know whether she had any13� �experience conducting FTE reviews prior to the14� �ECOT FTE review?15� � � �A.�No.16� � � �Q.�That she didn't have experience, or you17� �don't know?18� � � �A.�She didn't have FTE experience, no.19� � � �Q.�Do you know what her experience was?20� � � �A.�She was a classroom teacher for many21� �years, and then a building principal for many22� �years after that, and then a local school23� �superintendent, and then worked for the24� �department prior to coming to the area

Page 177

�1� �coordinator office on some school improvement�2� �initiatives.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�And what do you recall from your�4� �conversations with Rick Teeters, prior to the�5� �March review, other than what you've described�6� �for us so far?�7� � � �A.�I'm sure we talked about the concern�8� �about the -- using the counts, you know, about�9� �having to count hours.10� � � �Q.�Did Mr. Teeters express to you continued11� �concerns about the ability of ECOT to provide12� �that type of documentation to you?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�And did Mr. Teeters share with you15� �concerns he had about the financial impact of16� �the FTE review to ECOT given its inability to17� �provide those type of records to you?18� � � �A.�I'm sure in one way or another he did.19� �I don't recall specifically.20� � � �Q.�Did Mr. Teeters also share with you21� �concerns he had about the -- the fairness of the22� �process and the sufficiency of the notice by ODE23� �to ECOT that these type of records would be24� �considered?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�I'm sure he did.�2� � � �Q.�And are all the concerns that�3� �Mr. Teeters noted something that you would have�4� �shared with Cody Loew at one point or the other�5� �prior to the review?�6� � � �A.�I would think so.�7� � � �Q.�And was Mr. Loew's response each time�8� �simply that this was the manner by which the�9� �reviews were going to be conducted?10� � � �A.�Well, I'm thinking more in the sense11� �that I would have referred Rick to Cody with the12� �concerns rather than me trying to relay those13� �concerns or trying to act as intermediate.14� � � �Q.�That is, whatever the new standards15� �were, you weren't the one promulgating them,16� �that was ODE?17� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Objection to new standards.18� �BY MR. LITTLE:19� � � �Q.�You can answer.20� � � �A.�I -- I felt like I was in the middle of21� �the situation and I wanted him to talk directly22� �to -- to my superiors.23� � � �Q.�And do you know whether or not24� �Mr. Loew -- excuse me.�Did Mr. Loew share with

Page 179

�1� �you any follow-up communications he had with�2� �Mr. Teeters on those subjects?�3� � � �A.�No.�I was, again, aware that there was�4� �some discussion going on or supposed to be some�5� �discussion going on between ODE and some of the�6� �community school leaders about the requirements.�7� �I was not privy to those discussions.�8� � � �Q.�Now, you indicated there was a pre-FTE�9� �review meeting held at ECOT?�Excuse me.10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And you and Ms. Dewar were present?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�Mr. Teeter [sic] was present?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�And who else was present at that16� �meeting?17� � � �A.�I don't have notes on that meeting.18� �Abby kept some notes for me.�Rick probably19� �would remember who was there.20� � � �Q.�Do you recall there being an open issue21� �at that point in time, at the pre-FTE meeting,22� �as to what specific records ODE would be --23� �would be reviewing?24� � � �A.�What do you mean by an "open issue"?

Page 180

�1� � � �Q.�Do you recall there being some�2� �continued -- strike that.�3� � � � � �Do you recall there being any ambiguity�4� �in your mind as to what records would be�5� �reviewed by ODE as part of the FTE review at�6� �that time?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�And what was the ambiguity in your mind?�9� � � �A.�About what documentation was going to10� �suffice for showing engaged hours.11� � � �Q.�And -- and please explain.12� � � �A.�Well, what -- what were they going to be13� �able to show us to show that the student was14� �engaged for 920 hours.15� � � �Q.�Oh, you were -- the ambiguity in your16� �mind is whether ECOT would have the ability to17� �demonstrate those hours?18� � � �A.�Right.19� � � �Q.�Do you recall making a statement to20� �Mr. Teeters during this meeting that you were21� �not going to conduct an hour review of student22� �logins?23� � � �A.�Say that again.24� � � �Q.�Do you recall making a statement to

Page 181

�1� �Mr. Teeters during the course of this meeting�2� �that ODE would not be conducting an hour review�3� �of student logins?�4� � � �A.�No.�5� � � �Q.�Did you suggest to him in any way that�6� �ODE was backing off its stated intention to�7� �review login records?�8� � � �A.�No.�9� � � �Q.�Did you suggest to him in any way that10� �there would be any -- there would be no11� �consequences for the lack of having login12� �records?13� � � �A.�No.�The only suggestion that I made was14� �that we were not sure what was -- what was going15� �to be done with the information.16� � � �Q.�Did you indicate to -- strike that.17� � � � � �Following up on your answer, so what18� �you're saying is you communicated that you did19� �not know what would be done with the FTE review20� �results?21� � � �A.�Yes, that's fair.22� � � �Q.�And when you say you did not know what23� �would be done with the FTE review results, is24� �that because you were unclear, based upon what

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �had been communicated to you by your supervisor,�2� �as to the manner in which consequences would be�3� �imposed on that data?�4� � � �A.�I'm not going to ask you to repeat that�5� �question, I'm just going to tell you maybe in a�6� �way that answers what I think you're asking me.�7� � � �Q.�Okay.�8� � � �A.�Okay.�I think that it was unclear to�9� �us -- what we were told is to report what you10� �see as opposed to saying, well, you're going to11� �be able to make concrete decisions when you're12� �there about the number of hours for each student13� �and make some kind of adjustment in the FTE.14� � � �Q.�That is, you, at -- at the area15� �coordinator level, was not being asked to make16� �the adjustments?17� � � �A.�Or the final decision on how that was18� �going to be dealt with.19� � � �Q.�That is, you expected that someone more20� �senior to your position would be making the21� �determination as to the financial consequences22� �in the event the documentation that was being23� �sought was unavailable?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 183

�1� � � �Q.�And did you have any reason to believe�2� �that anyone at ODE was not intending to apply�3� �the 2015 FTE manual to the 2006 [sic] FTEs --�4� �reviews?�5� � � �A.�I was not sure what they were going to�6� �do with that.�7� � � �Q.�Did you inquire?�8� � � �A.�No.�9� � � �Q.�Did anyone tell you?10� � � �A.�No.11� � � �Q.�No one at any point in time suggested12� �that ODE was not going to apply the 2015 FTE13� �manual as written; is that correct?14� � � �A.�That's correct.15� � � �Q.�And, in fact, based upon your16� �experience, your expectation would be that ODE17� �would apply the 2015 FTE manual as written?18� � � �A.�I don't know that I can say yes to that.19� � � �Q.�Is that because you don't have20� �experience on that particular subject matter?21� � � �A.�With when they apply and when they don't22� �apply?23� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 184

�1� � � �Q.�In your experience, have you ever had an�2� �occasion in which the FTE manual that was in�3� �place at the time that was being applied to a�4� �particular FTE review was not fully enforced?�5� � � �A.�I would think there were times when it�6� �was not fully enforced.�7� � � �Q.�Can you think of an example for us?�8� � � �A.�No, I think it's based on -- my answer�9� �is based on interpretation of what a reviewer10� �would see when they were out there and whether11� �or not they would determine that they needed to12� �pull more records or go any further.13� � � �Q.�Okay.�Well, at some point a conclusion14� �was reached, but once the conclusion was15� �reached, it's been your experience the FTE16� �manual would be applied with uniformity to17� �whatever the conclusion was?18� � � �A.�In my experience, I can't tell you that19� �I've had a time when there was a major reduction20� �in -- in FTEs, so I -- from my experience, my21� �answer is no.22� � � �Q.�And -- and the answer you say no is23� �simply because, in your experience, the FTE24� �reviews you've conducted have been consistent

Page 185

�1� �with the FTE manuals; that is, the subject of�2� �the review had provided the documentation�3� �sufficient to satisfy whatever the inquiries�4� �were under the FTE manual?�5� � � �A.�To the best of my ability.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�All right.�Now, prior to the�7� �March FTE review for ECOT, you would have�8� �provided a list of students for which you would�9� �expect ECOT to pull records?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And those student names are randomly12� �drawn?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�And were there 750 students?15� � � �A.�750, yes.16� � � �Q.�And then when you arrived at ECOT for17� �the March FTE review, did you request files for18� �other additional students?19� � � �A.�Yeah, the -- the manual talks about20� �with -- with a large draw like that that you21� �provide two days ahead the names of the students22� �so that the school has time to pull those23� �records.24� � � � � �And I believe the first review that we

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �did with ECOT this time around, Rick ran the�2� �report, or someone in Rick's office ran the FTE�3� �detail report with all of the students, and then�4� �gave that to me, and I gave it to ODE to random�5� �sample 750 with ECOT receiving 600 two dates�6� �ahead, and then the last 150 I would have given�7� �them the day -- the first day we arrived.�8� � � �Q.�Have you given such list more than two�9� �days in advance in the past?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�Is there a -- do you have a -- is12� �it the approach you follow to try to give the13� �school as much notice as possible so that14� �massive quantities of files can be collected?15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�Okay.�And historically your practice17� �has been to give more than two days' notice for18� �the collection of --19� � � �A.�I would say the last time I did ECOT,20� �I'm sure that I gave them more than two days.21� � � �Q.�Okay.�Was there any --22� � � �A.�I'm pretty sure.23� � � �Q.�Was there any particular reason here to24� �give fewer days' notice than in the past?

Page 187

�1� � � �A.�Just based on all of the scrutiny that�2� �was now being placed on this, that if you didn't�3� �follow things exactly, then, you know, someone�4� �was going to say you weren't following the�5� �rules, so that was my rationale.�6� � � �Q.�So following things exactly -- when you�7� �say "things," you're talking about the materials�8� �by -- by the procedures and standards set forth�9� �in the 2015 FTE manual?10� � � �A.�Right.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�And so going through this12� �process, it was your intention to follow the13� �procedures and standards set forth in the 201514� �manual exactly?15� � � �A.�As best I could, yes.16� � � �Q.�Now, the March FTE review of ECOT, that17� �would have included yourself and at least three18� �other individuals?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�Ms. Dewar would have been one of those?21� � � �A.�Yes.22� � � �Q.�And who were the other two?23� � � �A.�Jim Lambert from area 2.�He's a24� �full-time coordinator.�And Chris Babal, who

Page 188

�1� �works at the department.�2� � � �Q.�Was this the first occasion in which you�3� �had a FTE review that included Chris Babal?�4� � � �A.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�And do you know whether or not Mr. Babal�6� �had participated in other FTE reviews at any�7� �point in time?�8� � � �A.�I don't know.�9� � � �Q.�Did he suggest or indicate to you that10� �he had?11� � � �A.�No.12� � � �Q.�And after that FTE review was conducted13� �in March, was there an exit conference?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�Now, during the course of the review16� �itself, did you share with anyone at ECOT any17� �concerns you had with respect to the18� �documentation being produced?19� � � �A.�No, the documentation for everything20� �other than matching the hours was impeccable.21� �We found -- I take that back.�We found some22� �errors the first time around, small errors, that23� �were relating to students who may have been24� �entered into the system and then fell out of the

Page 189

�1� �system before they logged in any time.�And I�2� �think those -- we referenced those in the first�3� �document.�They were small FTE amounts.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�5� � � �A.�They were minor.�6� � � �Q.�So based upon the standards that have�7� �been applied in 2011, the documentation that was�8� �made available by ECOT for your review as part�9� �of the March FTE review process would have10� �easily satisfied those standards?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�And did you make a specific request13� �during the course of the 2000 -- excuse me.�Did14� �you make a request during the course of the15� �March 2016 FTE review for copies of durational16� �records?17� � � �A.�Well, the durational records that we saw18� �in the first review had login/logout times, and19� �that's what we assumed they had available.20� � � �Q.�Well, I guess my question is a little21� �bit different.�Did you -- did you or any of the22� �other participants, on behalf of ODE, during the23� �course of the March 2016 FTE review, make a24� �specific request for any durational records?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�Several of my colleagues at some point�2� �during the first review asked whether it would�3� �be possible -- you know, what would -- what�4� �would be needed to get those, and I believe the�5� �general opinion that we were given was that�6� �those -- those were on multiple -- in multiple�7� �modules and that they would be very difficult to�8� �put together for the review.�9� � � �Q.�When you started the review, there were10� �already made available for you 600 student11� �files?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�And when you started your review, did14� �those student files have any login/logoff15� �records?16� � � �A.�All of them did.17� � � �Q.�Okay.�And is that because there had18� �been any type of specific request made by ODE19� �for those materials?20� � � �A.�Well, that's what we would have had in21� �our original letter to them, the letter that I22� �wrote to them saying what I was going to look23� �for.24� � � �Q.�So if I understand your testimony is

Page 191

�1� �there was certain login/logoff documentation�2� �maintained in the student files and then�3� �multiple members of the review team made�4� �inquiries of ECOT as to the availability of�5� �other types of durational records?�6� � � �A.�Whether that -- those would be�7� �available, what would that take.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�Was there an expectation those�9� �records would be available that day?10� � � �A.�No.11� � � �Q.�Or during the course of the March12� �review?13� � � �A.�No.�Was there an expectation from me?14� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.15� � � �A.�No.16� � � �Q.�Was -- was there an expectation17� �expressed by any of the other FTE reviewers that18� �such documentation was present for the March19� �review?20� � � �A.�No, I don't think so.21� � � �Q.�Okay.�So what you were making at that22� �point in time were inquiries of ECOT as to what23� �is the process that's necessary to collect that24� �type of data, if it's available?

Page 192

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�What would that take?�I mean, is�2� �it available, what would it take?�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�And you had told us earlier that�4� �Mr. Teeters had told you that he had concerns�5� �about the availability of that type of�6� �information?�7� � � �A.�Yes.�8� � � �Q.�And during the course of the March --�9� � � �A.�Or gathering that information.10� � � �Q.�Okay.�And during the course of the11� �March FTE review, was it once again shared with12� �you by individuals at ECOT that it would be13� �difficult to gather that type of information?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�Okay.�And did they also express to you16� �during the course of the March 2015 -- excuse17� �me, 2016 FTE review that there are certainly18� �different learning opportunities that students19� �participate in for which there is no measurement20� �of time?21� � � �A.�Yes.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�And were there any23� �recommendations then made during the course of24� �the March 2016 FTE review by the review team as

Page 193

�1� �to how those type of document -- how that type�2� �of documentation should be maintained on a�3� �going-forward basis?�4� � � �A.�No.�5� � � �Q.�Has the -- to your knowledge, had the�6� �Department of Education developed any type of�7� �guidelines that it has shared with eSchools or�8� �other blended schools with respect to the�9� �techniques or tools to be utilized for tracking10� �student engagement in terms of durational11� �records?12� � � �A.�I'm not aware of any.13� � � �Q.�And to your knowledge, has the14� �Department of Education developed any type of15� �guidelines or rules to assist eSchools for16� �documenting learning opportunities that do not17� �occur on a computer system?18� � � �A.�No, I'm not aware of any.19� � � �Q.�During the course of the March 2016 FTE20� �review, you would have seen teacher21� �certifications?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�And were those teacher certifications24� �reviewed as part of the review process?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�They were noted.�2� � � �Q.�When you say noted, what do you mean?�3� � � �A.�Well, let me think about that.�The�4� �teacher certifications didn't show up until the�5� �second review.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�7� � � �A.�I don't think they were in the first�8� �review.�I'm sorry.�9� � � �Q.�I don't think they were either.�That's10� �why I'm asking the question.11� � � � � �All right.�So teacher certifications12� �would have been made available to you in July of13� �2016?14� � � �A.�The second -- during the second review.15� � � �Q.�Okay.16� � � �A.�That's the first I'd seen those.17� � � �Q.�Okay.�So as part of the exit conference18� �at the conclusion of the March 2016 FTE review,19� �did your review team share with ECOT any20� �preliminary conclusions?21� � � �A.�Just general comments.�We complimented22� �them on the -- on the records and the helps they23� �had put into the records so we could easily find24� �the information that we were needing to look at,

Page 195

�1� �IEP records, certifications -- not�2� �certifications, the -- the certification that a�3� �computer had been delivered and/or that the�4� �parent declined that -- you know, the computer.�5� �Basic things that we had looked at in FY11, but�6� �they were -- the records were in good shape�7� �there.�8� � � � � �We noted the 14 errors and talked about�9� �those with them, and they understood what those10� �were and that they were going to go through --11� �the EMIS person was going to go through and look12� �for any other glitches that they might have had13� �that counted students for a small FTE amount14� �that they were going to take back out.�We15� �didn't consider those a big deal, and I don't16� �think they did either.�They just were going to17� �correct them.18� � � � � �I did not dwell on the -- on the lack of19� �hours.�As a matter of fact, I think I made a20� �statement about hoping we didn't have to review21� �750 files the second time.22� � � �Q.�Did you suggest there might be a desk23� �audit for the second review?24� � � �A.�If I did, I was mistaken, because they

Page 196

�1� �would never have qualified for a desk audit.�2� � � �Q.�So following up on your comment about�3� �not reviewing another 750 files, what do you�4� �mean by that?�5� � � �A.�Well, if they had all of the records --�6� �the -- the majority of the records in place for�7� �birth certificates and for special education and�8� �those cursory things that we looked at for the�9� �first time, I was hoping that we wouldn't come10� �back and do 750 more files to find the same11� �thing.�They -- they had good records.�And in12� �the second FTE review that we did confirmed13� �that.�Their records were good in those areas.14� �The big elephant in the room is, obviously, how15� �we're going to count the hours.16� � � �Q.�Okay.�So at the conclusion of the March17� �2016 FTE review, as part of this exit18� �conference, did you express to ECOT that, from19� �your standpoint, there were any material20� �concerns with the sufficiency of the21� �documentation that had been provided?22� � � �A.�No.23� � � �Q.�And was there any concerns expressed24� �to -- excuse me.�Did anyone -- were you -- were

Page 197

�1� �you the principal speaker on behalf of the FTE�2� �review group?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�And was there any communication�5� �by the FTE review group about concerns that�6� �group had with the login/logoff records that had�7� �been provided by ECOT as part of the March�8� �review?�9� � � �A.�I don't specifically remember talking10� �about that, no.11� � � �Q.�And do you recall there being any12� �communications by the FTE review group to ECOT13� �during this exit interview suggesting that other14� �types of documentation needed to be provided in15� �the future with respect to the measurement of16� �duration or student engagement?17� � � �A.�Well, that was in my file, in my letter18� �to them.19� � � �Q.�Was that communicated as part of the20� �exit interview?21� � � �A.�No.22� � � �Q.�Was it your expectation when the March23� �exit view -- exit interview was being conducted24� �that the real focus on maintaining student

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �engagement records or durational records should�2� �be for school year 2016 and '17?�3� � � �A.�Was it my expectation?�4� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�5� � � �A.�I didn't have an expectation.�6� � � �Q.�Did you communicate that it was your�7� �expectation, based upon the March review, that�8� �ECOT would not have to pull, for purposes of the�9� �second component of the review, all the student10� �files once again?11� � � �A.�I -- that was my hope that I expressed12� �to them.�And I'm -- I'm certain that I also13� �said, but I will let you know after I complete14� �this review and find out what I'm told to do the15� �second time.16� � � �Q.�And as you -- excuse me.17� � � � � �For purposes of this exit interview,18� �then it sounds like the only concerns that were19� �shared with ECOT related to the handful of20� �student files that had a couple issues that had21� �to be remedied and could be remedied fairly22� �easily?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�Otherwise, there was no substantive

Page 199

�1� �concerns expressed by you or the other members�2� �of the review team to ECOT as part of that exit�3� �interview?�4� � � �A.�That's correct.�5� � � �Q.�Now, after the completion of the exit�6� �interview, what's the next step that you would�7� �have undertaken in terms of processing the data�8� �that had been collected from ECOT?�9� � � �A.�I would have gathered any information10� �from the other reviewers, started writing a11� �report, gone through the checklist, and then12� �sent those to ODE.13� � � �Q.�And to whom at ODE would you have sent14� �that material?15� � � �A.�I think these were all coming back to16� �Cody.17� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Marion, it's been about an18� �hour.�Can we take five minutes?19� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Yeah, just one second.20� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Sure.21� �BY MR. LITTLE:22� � � �Q.�Were you asked to send your initial23� �write-up to anyone else other than Mr. Loew?24� � � �A.�No.

Page 200

�1� � � �Q.�And would you have provided oral reports�2� �to anyone in addition to whatever you're�3� �preparing in writing?�4� � � �A.�Oral reports?�5� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�6� � � �A.�No.�7� � � �Q.�Or -- I don't want to get stuck in�8� �semantics.�Was there other ways you were�9� �communicating what you -- what your report was10� �other than what you prepared and shared with11� �Mr. Loew?12� � � �A.�Ask me that again.13� � � �Q.�Sure.�Was there any -- excuse me.14� � � � � �You told us that there was a report that15� �you prepared and shared with Mr. Loew; is that16� �right?17� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�Yes, that's correct.18� � � �Q.�Other than communicating information19� �through that tool, was there any other way in20� �which you were communicating to other folks at21� �ODE the results of the ECOT March FTE review?22� � � �A.�No, I don't believe.23� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Okay.�We'll take a quick24� �break.

Page 201

�1� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Thank you.�2� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Off the record.�3� � � � � �(Recess.)�4� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Back on the record.�5� �BY MR. LITTLE:�6� � � �Q.�Sir, during the -- the exit review, did�7� �you suggest or intimate to ECOT that the area�8� �managers would not be calculating duration of�9� �time for student engagements that year?10� � � �A.�I don't recall, no.11� � � �Q.�Let me show you what I've marked as12� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 50.�Do you know an13� �individual by the name of Fred Ross?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�And how do you know Mr. Ross?16� � � �A.�He was an area coordinator in the17� �Cincinnati area.18� � � �Q.�Is he still one today?19� � � �A.�No.20� � � �Q.�And was there -- when did he leave that21� �position?22� � � �A.�Oh, I want to say he's been gone for23� �almost a year.24� � � �Q.�It appears that I have an email from him

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �of February 18, 2016.�If you look at the email�2� �at the middle of the page.�3� � � �A.�Yeah, yeah, he had to have left shortly�4� �after that because he hasn't -- he hasn't been�5� �around for a while.�6� � � �Q.�Do you know whether he was terminated?�7� � � �A.�No, I don't think he was -- I'm sure he�8� �wasn't terminated.�9� � � �Q.�Do you recall having discussions with10� �him about concerns he expressed about the manner11� �by which ODE was providing notice to the schools12� �of the FTE requirements?13� � � �A.�No.14� � � �Q.�Now, after you -- excuse me.15� � � � � �When did you provide your report to Cody16� �Loew based upon the March review of ECOT?17� � � �A.�I -- I don't recall, unless somebody18� �else has that.19� � � �Q.�Give me a sense, is that a -- a --20� �something you can do fairly quickly or does it21� �take some time?�I'm just trying to get a sense.22� � � �A.�Oh, my write-up to them?23� � � �Q.�Yes.24� � � �A.�Yes, I try to do that as soon as

Page 203

�1� �possible.�I'm guessing within ten days I had�2� �that back to ODE.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�4� � � �A.�And it may -- that one may have taken�5� �most of ten days because I was in and out of the�6� �office right after that review.�7� � � �Q.�During the course of the March review,�8� �were you keeping Mr. Loew or other individuals�9� �at ODE updated as to what materials you were10� �reviewing or assessing at ECOT?11� � � �A.�I did not, no.12� � � �Q.�Are you aware of -- aware of anyone on13� �the -- the reviewing team that was doing so?14� � � �A.�Let me think.�I don't think so.15� � � �Q.�Bear with me for a second.16� � � � � �Before you submitted your report to17� �Mr. Loew, did you have an opportunity to speak18� �to him about it?19� � � �A.�Yes, I think I did.20� � � �Q.�And what do you recall orally reporting21� �to Mr. Loew?22� � � �A.�Basically what showed up in the report.23� � � �Q.�Did he ask you any specific questions?24� � � �A.�I can't recall that.

Page 204

�1� � � �Q.�Do you recall whether you shared any�2� �information with Mr. Loew other than what's set�3� �forth in your report?�4� � � �A.�No.�5� � � �Q.�Let me show you what I've marked as�6� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 56.�Sir, have you seen�7� �Exhibit 56 before?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And this reflects a April 15, 2016,10� �email from you to Diana Lease?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�And it says, "Please find attached a13� �draft document I will send ECOT.�Please advise14� �when okay to send."15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�Who directed you to send this to17� �Ms. Lease?18� � � �A.�Cody Loew.19� � � �Q.�Is this the first time you communicated20� �any information directly to Ms. Lease?21� � � �A.�That I can recall, yes.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�Did Mr. Loew advise you as to why23� �he asked you to send this to Ms. Lease?24� � � �A.�No.

Page 205

�1� � � �Q.�Have you sent any other FTE�2� �review-related documents directly to Ms. Lease?�3� � � �A.�Not that I can recall.�4� � � �Q.�Would your report to Mr. Loew have been�5� �in a form different than what's attached to�6� �Exhibit 56, or is this the same thing you're�7� �referring to?�8� � � �A.�This -- I think this is the report.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�So Exhibit 56, starting with the10� �second page, would be an FTE report form that11� �you would have drafted?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�And are you the author of the contents14� �of this report?15� � � �A.�Yes.16� � � �Q.�Is this the standard form of report you17� �typically would have prepared after the18� �completion of an FTE review report?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�Or, excuse me, after completion of an21� �FTE review?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�That is, it's the same form you would24� �have used since 2008?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�This is the one I was telling you�2� �earlier that I usually put my report form�3� �information in the report as opposed to in the�4� �letter.�5� � � �Q.�Yes.�6� � � �A.�And at some point -- I don't know if it�7� �was in this one or one of the other ones -- that�8� �Cody reminded me to put the contents in the�9� �letter form and then send the letter, not10� �necessarily the report form.11� � � �Q.�Did -- is the point of the report to12� �create an accurate recitation of the FTE review?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�And if we could look at the first page15� �of your report, this one's marked draft.�Do you16� �know whether there were any subsequent revisions17� �made to the draft report?18� � � �A.�I don't believe there were.19� � � �Q.�Looking at the second page where it20� �says, "Issues and recommendations," where it21� �says, "A total of 750 student files were22� �reviewed, with an initial 600 SSIDs given to the23� �school three workdays before the review.�The24� �final 150 SIDs were given to the ECOT team on

Page 207

�1� �day one of the review.�Three ODE reviewers were�2� �present for two and a half days, an additional�3� �reviewer was present for two days."�4� � � �A.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�Final FTE review recommending occurring�6� �after June 13, 2016.�So would that have been in�7� �a time frame consistent with your -- with your�8� �historical approach?�9� � � �A.�I'm not sure I understand your question.10� � � �Q.�That is, the time that's identified in11� �your draft report for conducting the FTE review,12� �is that in a time frame that typically would13� �follow after the preliminary review?14� � � �A.�Well, this -- we were running later on15� �these because we got started later.�Is that16� �what you mean?17� � � �Q.�When do you typically start?18� � � �A.�In most years, you would start -- could19� �start as early as December, but I think the20� �manual talks about starting in January.21� � � �Q.�Okay.22� � � �A.�And this was, obviously, later than23� �that.24� � � �Q.�Is there a certain number of months that

Page 208

�1� �typically have passed between the -- conducting�2� �the first portion of the FTE review and then the�3� �second portion?�4� � � �A.�I think ideally the biggest space you --�5� �you could have is good especially if a district�6� �needs time to correct anything.�7� � � �Q.�The balance, then, of that paragraph�8� �we're looking at, "Using the FY15 FTE review and�9� �community school handbook, our initial reviewer10� �was not able to substantiate the following," and11� �then there's -- looks to be 1, "an attendance12� �record for the student that matches the amount13� �of time reported in EMIS (a learning opportunity14� �for an eSchool student could be computer15� �learning, reading resources documents, writing16� �papers, taking tests, doing research, field17� �trips, and conferencing with teachers,18� �et cetera.�There must be a login but that19� �cannot be the only proof of attendance."20� � � � � �That language that's in the21� �parenthetical there, where does that come from?22� � � �A.�I would think it came from the23� �checklist.24� � � �Q.�Okay.�And was this -- when you say

Page 209

�1� �issues and recommendations, you've identified as�2� �an issue that, from your review, the�3� �documentation that was provided by ECOT as part�4� �of the March review did not comply with the 2015�5� �FTE review manual; is that right?�6� � � �A.�Yes.�7� � � �Q.�And is this something that in the�8� �ordinary course, this particular report form�9� �would have been shared with the -- the eSchool?10� � � �A.�In my early days, I would have sent a11� �bland cover letter and then attached this12� �document.13� � � �Q.�Okay.14� � � �A.�Now we're supposed to put everything15� �that's in here that we want to report in the16� �letter itself.17� � � �Q.�So when you first prepared this memo,18� �your expectation was it would have simply been19� �forwarded to ECOT in this format, but then you20� �were told --21� � � �A.�That's the way I would have -- I would22� �have normally done it, yes.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�So why wasn't it the -- excuse24� �me.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � � � �Why wasn't it the case that during the�2� �exit interview that you would have advised ECOT�3� �that the information provided did not satisfy�4� �the 2015 FTE manual?�5� � � �A.�Why didn't I?�6� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�7� � � �A.�Because it was pretty obvious that it�8� �didn't.�9� � � �Q.�Well, during the exit interview you told10� �us that you commented positively on the records11� �they did produce in terms of their appearance12� �and their satisfaction of requirements.13� � � �A.�Right.14� � � �Q.�If you're going to comment positively,15� �why wouldn't you have commented negatively to16� �them about noncompliance issues?17� � � �A.�In the exit interview?18� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.19� � � �A.�I just didn't.20� � � �Q.�So was there any -- subsequent to the21� �exit interview, did you orally communicate to22� �ECOT that it was noncompliant with the standards23� �set forth in the 2015 FTE manual?24� � � �A.�No.

Page 211

�1� � � �Q.�And to your knowledge, was there anyone�2� �else associated with ODE that orally�3� �communicated to ECOT that it was noncompliant�4� �with the standards set forth in the 2015 FTE�5� �manual?�6� � � �A.�No.�7� � � �Q.�And so was the first occasion that you�8� �expected that would be communicated to ECOT is�9� �when ECOT was provided a copy of the FTE review10� �report from the March review either in a form11� �much like what has been attached here as Exhibit12� �56 or in a cover letter reciting this same data?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�Did you receive any response from15� �Ms. Lease to your correspondence of April 1516� �that we've marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 56?17� � � �A.�No.18� � � �Q.�And without telling me the content, did19� �you have any communications with Ms. Lease20� �regarding the subject of the FTE review report21� �form?22� � � �A.�I don't believe so.23� � � �Q.�Or the letter that was ultimately24� �composed based upon the contents of this report

Page 212

�1� �form?�2� � � �A.�No.�3� � � �Q.�If I could please direct your attention�4� �to Plaintiff's Exhibit 58.�Do you recognize�5� �that exhibit as, first, an email that was�6� �provided by Alice Dewar to you on April 21,�7� �2016?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And the letter that is attached to this10� �email, was this composed by Ms. Dewar?11� � � �A.�No.12� � � �Q.�Who composed this letter?13� � � �A.�This would be my letter.14� � � �Q.�And could you explain the process by15� �which Ms. Dewar is forwarding to you a copy of a16� �letter you composed?17� � � �A.�No.�I don't know why.�I might have --18� �well, I may know why.�I may have asked her to19� �proof the letter for me.20� � � �Q.�Okay.21� � � �A.�She's a former English teacher.22� � � �Q.�Is there anyone else that assisted you23� �in the drafting of the letter included as part24� �of Exhibit 58 other than perhaps one -- someone

Page 213

�1� �offering typographical or English corrections?�2� � � �A.�No, I would have talked with each of the�3� �people on the review team, but I would have�4� �drafted the letter myself.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�So you -- you drafted the letter�6� �with the input from the members of the review�7� �team?�8� � � �A.�Yeah, whatever they had available on the�9� �day -- you know, on the day that we finished the10� �review, I would have gathered all -- all the11� �information.12� � � �Q.�And was there anyone else that assisted13� �you, other than the review team, in drafting the14� �letter or otherwise had input in it?15� � � �A.�No.16� � � �Q.�You drafted the April 20, 2016, letter17� �based upon what you understood to be the18� �requirements and standards of the 2015 review19� �manual?20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�And I take it, then, you would have22� �drafted this letter sometime prior to April 21,23� �2016?24� � � �A.�Yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�And do you recall whether after you�2� �drafted it, there were any revisions or changes�3� �made other than with respect to typographical�4� �type of issues?�5� � � �A.�I don't think so.�6� � � �Q.�Was there a form letter that was made�7� �available to you to assist in the preparation of�8� �this?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�And when we're looking at the April 2011� �letter, can you give us a sense of what portions12� �of this would have been from a form letter13� �versus content that you created?14� � � �A.�Well, basically, the form letter talked15� �about -- starting out describing the school a16� �little bit better.�The basic guts of the letter17� �were the same.18� � � � � �As you can see, I pretty much took the19� �report form, which I used to think was good20� �enough to send, and then put it in the report21� �letter form that I was asked to put it in. I22� �think it covers the same information.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�That is, the report you initially24� �drafted served as the foundation for much of the

Page 215

�1� �content --�2� � � �A.�Right.�I would have cut it -- cut and�3� �pasted off of the report form and put it in --�4� �you know, put it into my letter.�5� � � �Q.�Looking at the third paragraph of the�6� �April 20, 2016, letter, and I'd like to direct�7� �your attention to the language that says,�8� �"Logins from ECOT learning management system�9� �that identify the length of time the student was10� �logged into the learning management system was11� �also available for each student in the file."12� � � � � �Do you see that?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�And then it reads, "Most login times on15� �these files did not substantiate five hours per16� �day of login time for the students reviewed.17� �ECOT staff reported that the learning management18� �system was only one of many ways for the student19� �time to be demonstrated, but other documents20� �were not in a form that would be available in21� �the amount of time the reviewers had to do the22� �initial review."23� � � � � �Do you see that?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 216

�1� � � �Q.�Do you -- but if I understood your prior�2� �discussions with Mr. Teeters, he had indicated�3� �not only could the records not be available to�4� �you during the course of the March review, but�5� �such records did not, in fact, exist at all; is�6� �that right?�7� � � �A.�No, I did not take it that way.�8� � � �Q.�Didn't he communicate to you that there�9� �are records that -- there's certain records10� �that -- or certain activities that are conducted11� �on the learning management system that are not12� �tracked from a time durational standpoint?13� � � �A.�Yes, he may have, but I understood it14� �that there were things that could be tracked and15� �that it would take a lot of documentation to16� �show that.17� � � �Q.�But I guess my question is, he indicated18� �to you there's a number of activities, in fact,19� �that are not tracked at all from a durational20� �standpoint?21� � � �A.�And he -- he could have told me that.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�Now, if you could please look at23� �the second page of your draft letter, the24� �paragraph at the top where it says,

Page 217

�1� �"Recommendations are as follows," do you see�2� �that?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�It says, at the last sentence, "ECOT is�5� �encouraged to develop a system of tracking total�6� �hours of student participation."�7� � � � � �Do you see that?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�Did that letter -- that language come10� �from a form letter?11� � � �A.�No, I don't believe.12� � � �Q.�And your letter doesn't indicate the13� �time frame for ECOT to develop that system?14� � � �A.�No, it doesn't.15� � � �Q.�Did you, at any point in time, have16� �communications with ECOT about the time frame17� �for developing such a system?18� � � �A.�No.19� � � �Q.�Did you mean to communicate to ECOT that20� �it would be important at some point in the21� �future that such a system be developed?22� � � �A.�Yes.23� � � �Q.�And what was your expectation as to when24� �such a system had to be developed?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�I didn't have an expectation.�2� � � �Q.�Sir, let me show you what I've marked as�3� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 59.�Bear with me for a�4� �second.�5� � � � � �Let me show you what I've marked as�6� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 59, please.�Sir, is�7� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 59 a copy of a�8� �correspondence of April 21, 2016, to Ms. Lease�9� �from yourself?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And that forwarded your draft of the12� �ECOT FTE review letter?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�And who requested you that -- requested15� �that you forward that to Ms. Lease?16� � � �A.�I would think Cody Loew.17� � � �Q.�And do you have a recollection of18� �speaking to Ms. Lease regarding that subject?19� � � �A.�No, I don't believe so.20� � � �Q.�Did Mr. Loew ask you why -- excuse me.21� � � � � �Did Mr. Loew at any point in time22� �provide you an explanation as to why you would23� �forward that to Ms. Lease?24� � � �A.�No.�My understanding would be that he

Page 219

�1� �wanted legal to look at it.�2� � � �Q.�Had you had legal review any other FTE�3� �review letters?�4� � � �A.�From ECOT?�From anyone?�5� � � �Q.�From anyone.�6� � � �A.�No.�Prior to this, no.�7� � � �Q.�After this, did you have any other FTE�8� �review letters reviewed by legal with respect to�9� �any other school other than ECOT?10� � � �A.�At some point in time, we were directed11� �to start putting all of the FTE review reports,12� �checklists on an O drive to ODE so someone else13� �could look at them before they went out.14� � � �Q.�Okay.�You received some type of15� �documentation from Cody authorizing the release16� �of documents?17� � � �A.�Usually that has been coming from Chris18� �Babal.19� � � �Q.�Okay.�I'll show you what's been marked20� �as Plaintiff's Exhibit 61.�Sir, is Exhibit 61 a21� �correspondence that you and others received by22� �Mr. Loew on or about May 2nd, 2016?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�And among other things, this provides a

Page 220

�1� �final FTE review checklist?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�The first paragraph of the exhibit�4� �references that there had been a meeting at ODE�5� �on a Friday afternoon, presumably the Friday�6� �before this May 2nd meeting.�Were you a�7� �participant in that meeting?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And indicated that there were a number10� �of questions and concerns expressed during the11� �course of that meeting.�Was that a meeting of12� �the area coordinators?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�And do you recall any questions or15� �concerns expressed as to matters relating to16� �durational records?17� � � �A.�Not specifically.�I think the attached18� �form -- you know, this is -- this was new.�We19� �had the checklist, but this was a more detailed20� �checklist where we had spaces to write comments21� �and things of that nature.�I think he wanted22� �everybody on the same -- he wanted to uni --23� �unify the process a little bit.24� � � �Q.�That is, the checklist that had been

Page 221

�1� �utilized by the -- as part of the March review�2� �of ECOT was a checklist you had based upon the�3� �2015 FTE manual?�4� � � �A.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�And was this checklist here supplanting�6� �the checklist found in the 2015 FTE manual?�7� � � �A.�Yes, I think this is -- this is the�8� �draft of -- of the checklist that we're supposed�9� �to use on each review.10� � � �Q.�Now, during the course of this late11� �April 2016 meeting, was any information provided12� �as to delays in issuing the initial FTE review13� �letters?14� � � �A.�I'm sorry, I don't understand your15� �question.16� � � �Q.�Sure.�Was there any discussions that17� �occurred at this meeting about any delays that18� �were occurring in issuing the initial FTE review19� �letters?20� � � �A.�No.21� � � �Q.�The initial FTE review letter that you22� �had drafted had a date of April 20, 2016?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�Do you understand that letter was not

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �mailed out for some time?�2� � � �A.�Yes, because I would have mailed it out.�3� � � �Q.�When would you have mailed it out?�4� � � �A.�As soon as I was authorized to release�5� �it.�6� � � �Q.�You were prepared to release it on April�7� �20th, 2016?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And what was the delay that was10� �occasioned in having the letter not issued until11� �much later?12� � � �A.�I don't know.13� � � �Q.�Did you make follow-up inquiries to14� �determine what was the holdup, if you will, in15� �issuing the initial FTE review letter?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�And to whom did you make those18� �inquiries?19� � � �A.�I'm going to guess to Cody Loew.20� � � �Q.�And do you recall on how many different21� �occasions you would have inquired as -- to22� �Mr. Loew as to the status in having the initial23� �review letter issued?24� � � �A.�No.

Page 223

�1� � � �Q.�Do you recall what explanation, if any,�2� �that Mr. Loew offered you for the delay in -- in�3� �issuing the initial FTE review letter?�4� � � �A.�No.�Just that it was still being�5� �reviewed.�6� � � �Q.�Was the review letter that you�7� �ultimately sent out in the same form as the one�8� �that you had initially drafted?�9� � � �A.�Yes, I believe so.10� � � �Q.�And let me show you what's been marked11� �as Plaintiff's Exhibit 67.�Sir, is Plaintiff's12� �Exhibit 67 the May 17 email that you sent to13� �Mr. Teeters, and others, providing the ECOT14� �initial review letter that had been dated April15� �20, 2016?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�And would this have then been the first18� �letter -- excuse me, first form of communication19� �in which ODE, to your knowledge, communicated to20� �ECOT that the record and documentation provided21� �as part of the March review did not substantiate22� �the FTEs for a number of the students?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�Did you have discussions with Mr. Loew,

Page 224

�1� �or anyone else at ODE, as to the action plan to�2� �address the issues at ECOT inasmuch as in the�3� �correspondence transmitted on May 17, 2016, it�4� �was being disclosed to ECOT that ODE's position�5� �was that the FTEs had not been sufficiently�6� �documented?�7� � � �A.�Did I have further discussions with�8� �Mr. Loew?�9� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.10� � � �A.�Is that your question about that?�No.11� � � �Q.�Did you have any further discussions12� �with anyone else at -- excuse me -- ODE as to --13� �other than Mr. -- Mr. Loew regarding that14� �subject?15� � � �A.�No.16� � � �Q.�What was your understanding, then, as to17� �how you were to proceed moving forward with ECOT18� �given the findings expressed on May 17 that the19� �documentation provided did not substantiate the20� �FTEs?21� � � �A.�We were told to complete the second22� �review and document what we saw.23� � � �Q.�Were you given any other guidance or24� �instruction from ODE on how to complete the ECOT

Page 225

�1� �FTE review for '16 other than move forward in�2� �implementing the 2015 FTE manual?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�So as of the transmittal of the letter�5� �of May 17, 2016, by you to Mr. Teeter, the only�6� �standards that have been provided to you by ODE�7� �on how to complete this FTE review are those set�8� �forth in the 2015 FTE manual?�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�If you could please look at the second11� �page of your letter that was forwarded to12� �Mr. Teeters.�As of --13� � � �A.�Second page?�Sorry.14� � � �Q.�I apologize.�I should be more precise15� �in my -- my question.�The second page of the16� �letter, not the exhibit.17� � � �A.�Right.18� � � �Q.�Again, the language we had where it19� �says, "ECOT is encouraged to develop a system of20� �tracking total hours of student participation,"21� �that's the language that was in your original22� �letter; is that correct?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�And no one from ODE had asked you to

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �strike that language from your letter; is that�2� �right?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�That is correct, no one's asked you to�5� �strike --�6� � � �A.�That's correct.�7� � � �Q.�And at this point in time, when this is�8� �communicated on May 17, 2016, you still haven't�9� �communicated to ECOT, from your perspective, a10� �timeline for the development of a system of11� �tracking total hours of student participation?12� � � �A.�That is correct.13� � � �Q.�And as of May 17, 2016, you've still not14� �had any discussions with your supervisor or15� �anyone at ODE regarding what that timetable16� �would be?17� � � �A.�That's correct.18� � � �Q.�The only timetable you're aware of is19� �the expectation as set forth in memorializing20� �your letter that the 2015 manual requires that21� �type of documentation to be available now?22� � � �A.�Yes, that's correct.23� � � �Q.�That is, it should have been available,24� �according to you, pursuant to that handbook, for

Page 227

�1� �purposes of the 2016 FTE review; is that right?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�Let me show you what I've marked as�4� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 68.�Sir, is Exhibit 68 a�5� �copy of an email sent from Mr. Teeters to you on�6� �May 19, 2016, after the forwarding by you to him�7� �of your initial FTE review letter?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�And on receipt of this letter, did you10� �share it with anyone else at ODE?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�And with whom did you share it?13� � � �A.�I would guess that I emailed it to Cody14� �Loew.15� � � �Q.�And did you discuss this letter with16� �Mr. Loew?17� � � �A.�No, I don't think so.18� � � �Q.�Did Mr. Loew respond to you in any way19� �after you forwarded a copy of what's been marked20� �as Plaintiff's Exhibit 68 to him?21� � � �A.�I don't think so, other than talking22� �about trying to schedule the next -- the final23� �review.24� � � �Q.�So you did not discuss with Mr. Loew

Page 228

�1� �any -- from a substantive standpoint, any of the�2� �contentions set forth in Mr. Teeters' letter?�3� � � �A.�No.�4� � � �Q.�And did you respond to Mr. Teeter any of�5� �the substantive issues raised in Mr. Teeters'�6� �letter?�7� � � �A.�No.�8� � � �Q.�And why not?�9� � � �A.�I just wanted that to come directly from10� �ODE at this point.11� � � �Q.�Do you know whether or not anyone at ODE12� �had responded to any of the substantive points13� �raised in Mr. Teeters' letter?14� � � �A.�I don't know.15� � � �Q.�And did you make any effort to inquire16� �further to determine whether someone was going17� �to respond to the substantive issues raised by18� �Mr. Teeters in his May 19 correspondence?19� � � �A.�No.20� � � �Q.�In the first -- there's -- there's four21� �numbered paragraphs in Mr. Teeters'22� �correspondence --23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�-- do you see that?

Page 229

�1� � � � � �And in the second paragraph, under�2� �number 1, it says, "Based on these statements,�3� �it's unclear to me whether ODE is requiring�4� �documentation of five hours per day of actual�5� �login time for purposes of this year's FTE�6� �review or whether it is simply recommending that�7� �ECOT begin implementing such documentation in�8� �the future.�Please advise whether ODE is�9� �specifically requiring ECOT to provide10� �documentation of actual login time (specifically11� �deeming such documentation to be a prerequisite12� �to FTE funding) for the 2015-2016 school year."13� � � � � �Do you see that?14� � � �A.�Yes.15� � � �Q.�You would agree that a response to that16� �question would be appropriate, correct?17� � � �A.�I -- I was, at that point, referring18� �these letters to the department for their19� �response.20� � � �Q.�Did you receive any other letters21� �comparable to this from any other eSchools that22� �you would have forwarded to Mr. Loew or other23� �individuals at ODE for response?24� � � �A.�No.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�I take it from how you described your�2� �job duties earlier that in the ordinary course�3� �when you receive a question from one of the�4� �schools that you're servicing, you always make�5� �your best effort to respond to those inquiries?�6� � � �A.�If I -- if it was appropriate, yes.�7� � � �Q.�And you certainly have had schools�8� �within your region that have asked questions�9� �that you've answered, in part, by providing them10� �excerpts of the FTE manual?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�And certainly the inquiry made by13� �Mr. Teeters in his May 19, 2016, correspondence14� �as to what documentation would be required to be15� �produced for purposes of FTE funding for the16� �2015-2016 school year would be information that17� �was important to know for purposes of preparing18� �for the second portion of the 2016 FTE review;19� �is that right?20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�Now, let me show you what I've marked as22� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 69.23� � � � � �And I should have asked, after the24� �forwarding of your letter to Mr. Teeters of the

Page 231

�1� �initial FTE review results, did you have any�2� �oral communications with him in anticipation of�3� �the final phase of the 2016 FTE review?�4� � � �A.�With Mr. Teeters?�5� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�6� � � �A.�I don't recall if we had a phone con --�7� �yeah, we did have a phone conference when we�8� �couldn't schedule -- couldn't get the last one�9� �scheduled.10� � � �Q.�That related to the simple scheduling11� �itself?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�Did you have any substantive discussions14� �with him about the methodology that would be15� �employed for completing the review?16� � � �A.�No.17� � � �Q.�And was -- was there anyone else that18� �you would have spoken to after the forwarding of19� �the initial FTE review letter other than20� �Mr. Teeters at ECOT?21� � � �A.�No.22� � � �Q.�Now, looking, please, at Plaintiff's23� �Exhibit 69, do you recognize this as a24� �correspondence from Mr. Loew of May 20, 2016?

Page 232

�1� � � �A.�Let me take a look at it.�2� � � �Q.�Sure.�3� � � �A.�Yes, I recognize this.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�And among other things, in this�5� �letter, Mr. Loew is identifying certain eSchools�6� �that are ineligible for desk audits and -- as�7� �part of the FTE process in 2016?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�Is this the first time that these type10� �of limitations had been placed by the department11� �on these categories of desk audits?12� � � �A.�I can't answer that.�I don't know.13� � � �Q.�Was it the first time it was14� �communicated to you that there were these --15� �these type of limitations placed on desk audits?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�Looking at the third bullet down, it18� �says, "I know some of you already have FTE19� �reviews underway.�It's worth pointing out again20� �to contact our office and Frank Stoy prior to21� �the review.�You should contact him before the22� �initial review and again before the final23� �review.�A lot can and does change between these24� �time periods.�Please give Chris your schedule

Page 233

�1� �so he knows when reviews are taking place."�2� � � � � �Who's Frank Stoy?�3� � � �A.�Frank Stoy works out of the department,�4� �I think, for the office of community schools, as�5� �opposed to our offices, office of funding and�6� �school choice.�7� � � �Q.�Would you have had the occasion to or�8� �need to speak to Mr. Stoy regarding the 2016 FTE�9� �reviews?10� � � �A.�No.11� � � �Q.�And prior -- prior to proceeding forward12� �with the second review of ECOT in 2016, I take13� �it that you would have reached out to Mr. Loew's14� �office to advise him that the review was going15� �to be conducted?16� � � �A.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�And was there any additional guidance or18� �information provided by Mr. Loew or anyone else19� �in his office as to the manner for which you20� �were to conduct the second phase of the ECOT21� �2016 FTE review?22� � � �A.�No.23� � � �Q.�So then the -- even as of this point in24� �May of 2016, the sole basis for conducting the

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �review was the 2015 FTE review manual?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�Do you know what the reference is to "a�4� �lot can and does change between the initial and�5� �final review"?�6� � � �A.�I can only guess that that's talking�7� �about if something has happened at the school�8� �that the reviewer should know about between the�9� �first review and the second review.�If they've10� �run into problems, I think it's a -- a11� �precaution to say, you know, check in and make12� �sure there aren't other things that you need to13� �be aware of before you go out to the review.14� � � �Q.�I'll show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 70.15� � � � � �Sir, do you recognize Exhibit 70 as16� �including, at the top, an email from Mr. Teeters17� �to, among others, yourself, asking for a18� �response to his May 19, 2016, correspondence?19� � � �A.�Yes.20� � � �Q.�And after receiving this email, did you21� �follow up with Mr. Rausch or Mr. Loew to22� �determine whether ODE was going to respond to23� �Mr. Teeters' correspondence?24� � � �A.�No.

Page 235

�1� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�I've got about five�2� �minutes left on this video.�3� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Why don't you go ahead and�4� �change that out then.�5� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Off the record.�6� � � � � �(Recess.)�7� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Back on the record.�8� �BY MR. LITTLE:�9� � � �Q.�Sir, do you recall receiving10� �instructions to not proceed with the final11� �review of ECOT?12� � � �A.�In relation to this document?13� � � �Q.�Just in general.�I'm just asking you in14� �general.�I handed that out to get it --15� �expedite our discussion, but I'm asking the16� �question in general.17� � � �A.�That I should not schedule the final18� �review?19� � � �Q.�Yes.20� � � �A.�No, I was trying to schedule it as soon21� �as I could, as I recall.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�So if I could have you look now23� �at Plaintiff's Exhibit 79, and there is an24� �email, the second one from the top, from Cody

Page 236

�1� �Loew to Alice Dewar that says -- dated July --�2� �excuse me, June 21, that says, "Hold on�3� �contacting ECOT right now."�4� � � � � �Do you see that?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�Who was coordinating the rescheduling�7� �of -- or excuse me, the scheduling of the final�8� �phase of the FTE review for ECOT?�Was it you or�9� �was it Ms. Dewar?10� � � �A.�No, it was me, but I was -- as we got11� �into June, I had some vacation times and I was12� �out of town for several days.�And at one point,13� �I asked Abby if she could -- Alice -- if she14� �could keep in contact with Cody and find out15� �what days we were going to go.16� � � �Q.�Okay.�If you look at the email below17� �that from Alice or Abby Dewar, dated June 21,18� �2016, it says, "Cody, just for clarification, do19� �you want me to contact both Ron and Jack Pierson20� �to go with us or just one of them?�I honestly21� �believe it would be good to have them both since22� �there are so many files.�Please advise.�Also,23� �I will contact Rick at ECOT and explain that we24� �will plan to be at ECOT July 5, 6, and 7.�There

Page 237

�1� �is no doubt that we will need clear direction in�2� �regard to the exact information that you expect�3� �us to glean during the file reviews."�4� � � � � �Do you see that?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�And do you recall participating in any�7� �communications with any of the folks at ECOT�8� �regarding -- excuse me, ODE -- regarding�9� �questions or ambiguities as to what specific10� �documentation would be expected to be produced11� �by ECOT at the final FTE review in July of 2016?12� � � �A.�No.13� � � �Q.�From your standpoint, the expectation14� �was that ECOT would be required to produce all15� �of the information set forth in the July --16� �excuse me, the 2015 FTE manual at the July 201617� �FTE review; is that right?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�And your expectation was that at the20� �July 2016 FTE review, ECOT would be required to21� �produce documents that would satisfy the22� �requirements and standards set forth in the 201523� �FTE manual?24� � � �A.�Yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�And your testimony is at no time prior�2� �to the July 2016 FTE review at ECOT did anyone�3� �at ECOT -- excuse me, anyone at ODE suggest to�4� �you that there would be any other set of�5� �standards applied to ECOT other than those set�6� �forth in the 2015 FTE review manual?�7� � � �A.�Well, the document -- the comment that�8� �was made was document what you see.�9� � � �Q.�I understand that, but no one suggested10� �to you that there would be a different standard11� �applied to ECOT versus -- other than what was12� �set forth in the 2015 FTE review manual; is that13� �right?14� � � �A.�That's correct.15� � � �Q.�Now, do you recall being requested by16� �ECOT to provide the list of the student names as17� �quickly as possible?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�Okay.�And who made that request to you?20� � � �A.�I don't know if it was Rick or -- it21� �would probably have been Rick.22� � � �Q.�And let me show you whether -- excuse23� �me.�Let me show you what I've marked as24� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 83.�Are you copied on the

Page 239

�1� �email at the top of the first page of�2� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 83 from Cody Loew to�3� �yourself and Alice Dewar?�4� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�Yes.�5� � � �Q.�And Mr. Loew is advising you that, do�6� �not send out the list of students' files to be�7� �reviewed at ECOT prior to the timeline set forth�8� �in the guidelines even though there are a lot of�9� �records?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And that was true even though the12� �request was being submitted during the 4th of13� �July weekend?14� � � �A.�Well, specifically, I think there was15� �two workdays in there.16� � � �Q.�If I understand the request at the17� �middle of the page from Abby or Alice Dewar to18� �Cody is, do you want me to go ahead and forward19� �this to Rick at ECOT?�I think it's important to20� �give him as much time as possible to pull files,21� �especially because of the 4th of July.22� � � �A.�Right.23� � � �Q.�Please advise.�Do you see that?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 240

�1� � � �Q.�You were copied on that email?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And you would have thought that would�4� �have been a fair request by Ms. Dewar?�5� � � �A.�Well, fair is the time that's in the�6� �manual is what they were following, so...�7� � � �Q.�Fair is that historically you've�8� �provided much more time than what's set forth in�9� �the manual; is that right?10� � � �A.�In FY11 I certainly did.11� � � �Q.�Okay.�Do you think that given the12� �volume of the records that were being requested13� �here, it would have made more sense to provide14� �ECOT more notice than two days' business notice15� �given that the request was submitted during the16� �4th of July holiday week?17� � � �A.�I would have had no problem with that.18� � � �Q.�Now, are you saying that at least as of19� �June 27, 2016, you're not given any more20� �specific instructions from anyone at ODE about21� �how to conduct this review other than to appear22� �on certain dates and conduct the review in the23� �ordinary fashion?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 241

�1� � � �Q.�As of the time that the review was�2� �conducted -- excuse me.�At the time the review�3� �was conducted in July, you had understood that�4� �ECOT had sued the Department of Education?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�And who advised you of that?�7� � � �A.�Give me some time to think on that.�It�8� �was shortly before we went out there, and I�9� �believe that it was Cody.�Diane Lease may have10� �been there, also.11� � � �Q.�Was that an in-person meeting?12� � � �A.�Yes.�We went to the department first,13� �the day of -- the first day of the review.14� �Because we weren't able to go out until the15� �judge heard the issues.16� � � �Q.�Who else did you meet with other than17� �Ms. Lease and Mr. -- Mr. Loew?18� � � �A.�Formally, no one.�There was another19� �lawyer at ODE that day that worked with Diane20� �Lease, but I don't -- I didn't really meet with21� �her.�She was in the offices.22� � � �Q.�Okay.�Were you given any instructions23� �on how to conduct the FTE review based upon your24� �meeting with Cody Loew and Ms. Lease?

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � � � �MR. COLE:�And here I would caution you�2� �that to the extent you received legal advice�3� �from Ms. Lease, you are instructed not to share�4� �that with Mr. Little.�5� � � � � �THE WITNESS:�All right.�6� �BY MR. LITTLE:�7� � � �Q.�The only thing I've asked at this point�8� �is whether you received any advice.�I'm not�9� �asking for you to share the advice with me.10� � � � � �See the distinction?11� � � �A.�I do, but I'm looking at you two.12� � � � � �MR. COLE:�If you were given -- I'm13� �going to assert attorney/client privilege to the14� �extent you received any advice at that meeting15� �with Ms. Lease.16� � � � � �If you had a meeting separately with17� �Mr. Loew at which you did not discuss legal18� �advice that Ms. Lease had given, but rather19� �operational instructions from Mr. Loew, you can20� �testify as to that.21� � � � � �THE WITNESS:�Okay.22� � � �A.�I don't believe there was any additional23� �information given.24� �BY MR. LITTLE:

Page 243

�1� � � �Q.�And I'll just ask you the question for a�2� �yes or no response.�Did Ms. Lease give you�3� �legal advice that day?�4� � � �A.�No, I don't believe.�5� � � �Q.�Did you solicit any legal advice from�6� �Ms. Lease that day?�7� � � �A.�No.�8� � � �Q.�So what did you and Ms. Lease discuss?�9� � � �A.�I don't recall.�I mean, we didn't have10� �a long discussion.11� � � �Q.�And was it -- did any of the other12� �individuals who participated in the FTE review13� �also attend this meeting?14� � � �A.�No.15� � � �Q.�So later that afternoon you appeared at16� �ECOT's offices?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�And you were given access to how many19� �student files at that point?20� � � �A.�The first 600.21� � � �Q.�And then did you provide that day a22� �request for another 150 files?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�In the course of three days, were you

Page 244

�1� �given access to 750 student files?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�And were the contents of those files�4� �such that if you were conducting the review�5� �based upon the standards and requirements that�6� �were in place in 2011 that you would have�7� �identified the documentation as being sufficient�8� �to support the FTEs claimed?�9� � � �A.�No.10� � � �Q.�What were the issues that were -- that11� �existed with respect to any of the files or12� �records based upon the standards or requirements13� �of 2011?14� � � �A.�Oh, 2011 or 2015?15� � � �Q.�I said earlier 2011.16� � � �A.�Oh.�Can you ask me that one again?17� � � �Q.�Oh, sure.�That's fine.18� � � �A.�I'm losing it.19� � � �Q.�Were the contents of the files such that20� �if you were conducting the review based upon the21� �standards and requirements that were in place in22� �2011 that you would have identified the23� �documentation as being sufficient to support the24� �FTEs being claimed?

Page 245

�1� � � �A.�There were some changes in the documents�2� �the second time around.�Let me think about what�3� �was there.�The -- the login/logout time was not�4� �there, but there was a way to determine login�5� �time, and we were able to determine whether�6� �there was 105 hours in between logins.�So, yes,�7� �I would say that's a yes.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�9� � � �A.�And all the other documents were there,10� �the special ed. documents and the birth11� �certificates and proofs of residence.12� � � �Q.�So the only documentation that was not13� �present for the July FTE review was that14� �additional documentation that was being15� �requested for the first time starting in January16� �2016?17� � � �A.�Yes.18� � � �Q.�Now, did you -- the records that were19� �produced included records that allowed you to20� �make a determination that more than -- excuse21� �me -- less than 105 hours elapsed between a22� �student's login on the computers?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�And what's your purpose in making that

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �inquiry?�2� � � �A.�I'm sorry?�3� � � �Q.�Why do you make that inquiry?�4� � � �A.�On the 105 hours?�5� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�6� � � �A.�Because that's what we've always done.�7� � � � � �That is to determine whether or not the�8� �student has to be withdrawn if they did not have�9� �a -- a login time between that period.10� � � �Q.�Now, with respect to any form of11� �durational records, your testimony is there was12� �none made available to you at that time?13� � � �A.�During the second review?14� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.15� � � �A.�Yes, there was not.16� � � �Q.�And was there an exit interview17� �conducted at the conclusion of the -- the final18� �FTE review?19� � � �A.�Yes.�I was not there the third day, so20� �I think Abby Dewar did that.21� � � �Q.�Did you assist her in preparing the22� �statements for the exit interview?23� � � �A.�No.�No.�I wasn't there.24� � � �Q.�Your -- your participation, then, in

Page 247

�1� �this -- what I term the final portion of the FTE�2� �review would have been limited to the day and a�3� �half of time?�4� � � �A.�First -- yes.�Yes, because the first�5� �day was short.�6� � � �Q.�Based upon the review that you�7� �participated in, did you compile any form of�8� �records or report?�9� � � �A.�No.�We were just compiling the usual10� �information on whether the students met the time11� �or the login times and the -- and checking the12� �special ed. records, checking birth13� �certificates.14� � � �Q.�So did you -- was your review for the15� �final portion of the FTE review limited to the16� �application of the standards that had been17� �placed in 2011?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�Did you, however, make an attempt to20� �review any records with respect to the new21� �standards put in place in January 2016?22� � � �A.�Yes.�2015.23� � � �Q.�2 -- okay.�And with respect to those --24� �the new standards, did you conclude that the

Page 248

�1� �documentation was not being produced?�2� � � �A.�Yes.�3� � � �Q.�Was that something that you would have�4� �memorialized in some form of report?�5� � � �A.�Yes.�6� � � �Q.�And what's the form of report that you�7� �would have prepared based upon the completion of�8� �the final or the second phase of the 2016 FTE�9� �report?10� � � �A.�It would be the report form, the11� �checklist, and the FTE review letter.12� � � �Q.�Are those three different documents?13� � � �A.�Yes.14� � � �Q.�And the report form you would have --15� �when did you complete the preparation of that?16� � � �A.�Oh, within -- again, within probably ten17� �days of the final review, I would have gathered18� �notes from Abby and relied on -- on Abby's notes19� �for the total three days and then put that20� �together.21� � � �Q.�And to whom would you have submitted22� �that report?23� � � �A.�I would have submitted it on the O drive24� �to ODE.

Page 249

�1� � � �Q.�And would you have notified Mr. Loew�2� �that that had occurred?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�And then the checklist you referred to,�5� �when did you complete that?�6� � � �A.�I completed them all when I -- I didn't�7� �send any of them on the O drive until I had them�8� �all complete.�9� � � �Q.�Okay.�So within ten days or so of the10� �completion of the July FTE review, you would11� �have completed first the report form, second the12� �checklist, and then third the FTE review letter?13� � � �A.�Yeah, I can't verify that that's the14� �order, but I'm guessing that would be the order15� �I would do them in.16� � � �Q.�And nevertheless, once you completed17� �each three of those documents, you had18� �transmitted them to ODE through their placement19� �on the O drive?20� � � �A.�Yes.21� � � �Q.�And you would have, as to each of those22� �three items, advised Mr. Loew that they were23� �available for his further review?24� � � �A.�Yes.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �Q.�Did you receive any comments on any of�2� �those three documents from Mr. Loew or anyone�3� �else at ODE?�4� � � �A.�No.�5� � � �Q.�And the FTE review letter that you�6� �prepared, is that addressed to the attention of�7� �Rick Teeters?�8� � � �A.�Yes.�9� � � �Q.�Do you know whether that letter has been10� �issued by you to Mr. Teeters?11� � � �A.�I'm not aware that it's been issued.12� � � �Q.�And have you had any communications with13� �anyone at ODE as to the time frame for your14� �ability to issue that letter to Mr. Teeters?15� � � �A.�Ask me that question again.16� � � �Q.�Sure.�Have you had any communications17� �with anyone at ODE regarding the time frame for18� �your issuance of that letter to Mr. Teeters?19� � � �A.�I have inquired once as to when that was20� �going to be released so I could send it.21� � � �Q.�And to whom did you make that inquiry?22� � � �A.�Cody Loew.23� � � �Q.�And what response did he provide you?24� � � �A.�Didn't give a response.

Page 251

�1� � � �Q.�Did you make that inquiry --�2� � � �A.�It wasn't -- he said it wasn't -- they�3� �weren't ready to do that yet.�4� � � �Q.�Did he offer you any explanation as to�5� �why ODE was not prepared to allow you to proceed�6� �with issuing the final FTE review letter to�7� �ECOT?�8� � � �A.�No.�9� � � �Q.�Did you make inquiries to anyone else at10� �ECOT -- excuse me, ODE, as to the time frame for11� �the release of the final FTE review letter to12� �ECOT?13� � � �A.�I may have to Chris Babal.�And I can't14� �recall whether I would have sent that to them15� �both at the same time or one or the other, but16� �that would be the only other possibility would17� �be asking Chris.18� � � �Q.�And short -- and separate and apart from19� �any inquiries that you would have made, has20� �anyone else shared with you from ODE the -- any21� �issues or concerns with the release of that22� �letter to ECOT?23� � � �A.�I'm sorry, could you ask me that one24� �again?

Page 252

�1� � � �Q.�Sure.�I know sometimes people give you�2� �information based upon you asking a question or�3� �you prompting, but irrespective of whether you�4� �prompted the subject matter, has anyone at ODE�5� �shared with you any information as to the timing�6� �or the circumstances and the timing of that�7� �release of the final FTE review letter to ECOT?�8� � � �A.�No.�9� � � �Q.�Has the final FTE review letter been10� �issued to Findlay Digital?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�And when did you complete that?13� � � �A.�I think I sent that out a week ago or14� �thereabouts.15� � � �Q.�And was there a particular form of16� �letter that you utilized in sending that to17� �Findlay; that is, was it a form letter, or how18� �was that -- how was that constructed?19� � � �A.�Same -- the same as the ones that you've20� �seen here for ECOT.21� � � �Q.�Okay.�So the -- the preliminary letter22� �that we've looked at is a form of letter that23� �was also used as part of the final FTE review24� �letter?

Page 253

�1� � � �A.�The -- the preliminary letter?�2� � � �Q.�Yes.�3� � � �A.�I'm not following you.�4� � � �Q.�You showed us the -- your drafts and the�5� �final letter that you sent to ECOT --�6� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�7� � � �Q.�-- showing the results from the March�8� �review, for example.�9� � � �A.�Right.10� � � �Q.�Is that the same form of letter you used11� �in crafting the final FTE review letter to ECOT?12� � � �A.�To ECOT, yes.13� � � �Q.�Okay.14� � � �A.�Were you talking about Findlay Digital?15� � � �Q.�Well, I was talking about Findlay16� �Digital, but I'm just trying to follow up on17� �your comment.18� � � �A.�Okay.19� � � �Q.�So --20� � � �A.�So Findlay Digital letter would have --21� �be in the same format that the ECOT letter would22� �be in.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�And the -- the ECOT letter that24� �you drafted and -- and placed on the O drive,

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �it's in the same format as the prior preliminary�2� �draft letter that you had prepared?�3� � � �A.�Yes.�4� � � �Q.�Okay.�Now, what were the conclusions�5� �that you placed in your final FTE review letter�6� �for ECOT?�7� � � � � �THE WITNESS:�If that hasn't been�8� �completed yet, should I be saying that?�9� � � � � �MR. COLE:�It's fine.�You put together10� �a draft?11� � � � � �THE WITNESS:�Yeah.12� �BY MR. LITTLE:13� � � �Q.�And so what did the final say?14� � � �A.�The final said there was not15� �documentation for 920 hours.16� � � �Q.�And was that for each of the students17� �that were the subject of the review?18� � � �A.�Yes.19� � � �Q.�So for each of the 750 students that20� �were the subject of the FTE review in July of21� �2016 for ECOT, the conclusion you put in the22� �letter is there was not sufficient documentation23� �to support the 920 hours of learning24� �opportunities?

Page 255

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�2� � � �Q.�And was, in fact, the conclusion reached�3� �in your correspondence is that none of the FTEs�4� �for those 750 -- 750 students were documented?�5� � � �A.�None of the FTEs?�6� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�7� � � �A.�There would be some FTEs for certain on�8� �all of those students.�9� � � �Q.�Did your letter document what portion of10� �the FTE was doc -- was supported --11� � � �A.�No.12� � � �Q.�-- and which was not?13� � � �A.�No.�There was no -- there was no way to14� �figure that.�There was no durational15� �information given on the second review.16� � � �Q.�Okay.17� � � �A.�There was no starting and ending time at18� �all.19� � � �Q.�So because there was not durational20� �records in place, your conclusion was that ECOT21� �had failed to document any of the learning22� �opportunity hours for those 750 students?23� � � �A.�You know, we -- we commented on the24� �difference.�There was the teacher certification

Page 256

�1� �letter that was in the second one.�2� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�3� � � �A.�And I commented on that in some fashion�4� �as being a different document than we received�5� �the first time.�But I think I said that that�6� �didn't substantiate the 920 hours.�7� � � �Q.�So even with the benefit of the teacher�8� �certification, the conclusion that is reached in�9� �your letter that you prepared regarding the ECOT10� �June 2016 FTE review is that as to those 75011� �students, there is no -- no funding owed?12� � � �A.�I didn't say that.13� � � �Q.�Okay.�You concluded -- I'm sort of at a14� �disadvantage because I don't have your letter.15� � � �A.�Yeah, me too.16� � � �Q.�So let me -- let me see if I can -- let17� �me see if I can summarize this better.18� � � � � �Based upon the 2015 FTE manual and the19� �standards set forth therein, you concluded that20� �ECOT had not sufficiently documented the21� �learning opportunities for the 750 students that22� �had been reviewed as part of the 2016 July23� �review?24� � � �A.�Yes.

Page 257

�1� � � �Q.�Did your letter offer any type of�2� �recommendations or instruction to ECOT?�3� � � �A.�To develop documentation forms.�4� � � �Q.�Much like in your letter that was sent�5� �out in May, did this draft letter that you�6� �prepared in July or early August contain�7� �language recommending that ECOT develop, in the�8� �future, documentation or programs that would�9� �track student duration?10� � � �A.�I believe so, yes.11� � � �Q.�And was the same language used in your12� �draft letter for the July FTE review that was13� �used for the -- or found in your May letter?14� � � �A.�Say that one again.�I'm sorry.15� � � �Q.�Sure.�And, you know what, it's going to16� �be easier for me to pull out your prior letter,17� �so excuse me for just a second.18� � � �A.�Okay.19� � � �Q.�If you could please look back at20� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 67.21� � � �A.�Okay.�Got it.22� � � �Q.�And looking at the second page of the23� �letter that was sent out on May 17, 2016 -- and24� �we looked at this earlier -- it has the language

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �in the last sentence of the first paragraph that�2� �ECOT is encouraged to develop a system of�3� �tracking total hours of student participation.�4� � � � � �Is that same language found in your --�5� �the draft letter that you prepared reflecting�6� �your findings from the June -- excuse me, the�7� �July 2016 FTE review?�8� � � �A.�I think so.�Without having that letter�9� �in front of me, I can't -- you know,10� �substantially, I don't think it was much11� �different language.12� � � �Q.�Okay.�And from a substantive13� �standpoint, was the letter that you prepared in14� �July -- strike that.15� � � � � �Based upon when you conducted the July16� �review, I assume that letter was completed17� �sometime in July by you?18� � � �A.�Yeah.�When -- remind me when the review19� �was.20� � � �Q.�The week following July 4th.21� � � �A.�So within ten days I would have had that22� �done.23� � � �Q.�Okay.�So sometime by the middle of24� �July, you would have completed that letter?

Page 259

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�2� � � �Q.�And that letter that you prepared by the�3� �middle of July summarizing your findings for the�4� �benefit of ECOT, was that letter -- did it�5� �pretty much track what we're looking at here in�6� �Exhibit 67?�7� � � �A.�Track in terms of the same formatting?�8� � � �Q.�Yes, sir.�9� � � �A.�Yes.10� � � �Q.�And did it track also, for the most11� �part, the same conclusions?12� � � �A.�Yes.�There were comments made in the13� �report regarding the differences in what we saw14� �the first time and the second time, and I think15� �some references to documents that were asked for16� �that we weren't -- we were told would not be17� �provided.18� � � �Q.�Okay.19� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Doug, I can check with20� �Chris, but do we have the report prepared by21� �this witness together with the checklist and the22� �FTE review letter?23� � � � � �MR. COLE:�I anticipated you'd be going24� �that way, and I'm already in communications to

Page 260

�1� �see whether it's been produced or not.�So I�2� �don't have a final answer on that yet.�3� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�I'm happy to blame it all�4� �on Chris Hogan.�5� � � � � �MR. COLE:�I don't know that that's --�6� �would be correct, so I'm trying to track that�7� �down.�8� �BY MR. LITTLE:�9� � � �Q.�During the course of the July FTE review10� �at ECOT, do you recall any particular exchanges11� �that you had with any ECOT representatives?12� � � �A.�We called on -- who was in here earlier?13� � � �Q.�Brittny?14� � � �A.�Brittny.�Brittny was the only ECOT15� �employee that -- that was there the first two16� �days when I was there, and she was not in the17� �room unless we had a specific question to ask18� �her.19� � � �Q.�Okay.�Do you recall any specific20� �questions that were posed to her?21� � � �A.�I believe we asked early on to talk22� �about the teacher certification and what that --23� �what that meant, what it was showing us, and at24� �some point asked for durational login/logout

Page 261

�1� �sheets, or anything like that, which she�2� �deferred to legal counsel.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�And you had legal counsel with�4� �you the entire time you were present?�5� � � �A.�The two days that I was there, yes.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�7� � � �A.�I'm thinking she was there the first�8� �day.�She certainly was there the first day,�9� �yes.10� � � �Q.�Sir, let me show you what I've marked as11� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 156.�You're not copied on12� �this letter.�I'm just -- my first question is13� �whether you're familiar with this format of14� �review and communications regarding a final FTE15� �review.16� � � �A.�Let me read it over.17� � � �Q.�Sure.18� � � �A.�Again, your question was whether this19� �looks familiar to me?20� � � �Q.�Are you familiar with this form?21� � � �A.�It looks to be similar to the -- the22� �forms that I used in terms of the letter23� �content.24� � � �Q.�Okay.�Similar in the sense of this is

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �the form of document you would have used in July�2� �of 2016 to prepare the ECOT final FTE review�3� �letter?�4� � � �A.�Right.�5� � � �Q.�Is the doc -- is the type of language --�6� �for example, look at the heading where it says,�7� �"Issues reported to ODE."�8� � � �A.�Uh-huh.�9� � � �Q.�Is that a format that you used in the10� �letter you drafted back in July?11� � � �A.�Well, I should have used the same12� �language that I would have used -- I didn't put13� �a title on it, but I said, "The following issues14� �will be documented."15� � � �Q.�What are you referring to, sir?16� � � �A.�On -- on Exhibit 67, on my initial17� �review letter dated April 20th.�I didn't put18� �the -- the heading in there, "Issues reported to19� �ODE," but stated, "The following issues will be20� �documented and reported to ODE."�That's what21� �I'm referring to.�I didn't bold and underline22� �that statement.23� � � �Q.�Your letter that is marked as part of24� �Plaintiff's Exhibit 67 has -- the first

Page 263

�1� �paragraph at the top of the second page of your�2� �letter has, "Recommendations are as follows."�3� � � � � �Do you have that type of language in the�4� �letter drafted in July?�5� � � �A.�Recommendations.�I'm not -- I'm not�6� �understanding where you're referring to�7� �recommendations.�8� � � �Q.�Sure.�Plaintiff's Exhibit 67 --�9� � � �A.�Okay.10� � � �Q.�-- your letter that was dated April11� �20th --12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�-- but sent out on May 17th, second page14� �of your letter at the top says, "Recommendations15� �are as follows."16� � � �A.�Oh, yes.�Yes.17� � � �Q.�Is that language found in your letter18� �that you prepared in July reflecting the FTE19� �review results?20� � � �A.�I think so.21� � � �Q.�You made a reference to issues being22� �reported to ODE.�I didn't see that language in23� �your letter of April 20, 2016.�Is that --24� �forgive me if I'm missing that.

Page 264

�1� � � �A.�The fourth paragraph.�2� � � �Q.�Okay.�So it says, "The following issues�3� �will be documented and reported to ODE."�4� � � �A.�Right.�5� � � �Q.�Okay.�I see where you're at now.�So�6� �you believe that in the letter you drafted in�7� �July of 2016, there's language that says�8� �something to the effect, the following issues�9� �will be documented and reported to ODE; is that10� �right?11� � � �A.�Yes.12� � � �Q.�And you also think that letter contains13� �a recommendation section?14� � � �A.�I believe so.15� � � �Q.�Okay.�Now, as -- as part of your area16� �coordinator -- coordination -- or coordinator17� �meetings, have you been made aware of, for18� �example, the -- the FTE results of Buckeye19� �Online School for Success?20� � � �A.�No.21� � � �Q.�Would you have been made aware of the22� �FTE review results from Virtual Community23� �School?24� � � �A.�No.�Now, when you say made aware of, do

Page 265

�1� �you mean that we passed these out and talked�2� �about them, or --�3� � � �Q.�No.�4� � � �A.�What are you referencing?�5� � � �Q.�Whether you were advised during the�6� �course of the -- these meetings about the�7� �results of the FTE reviews from the other�8� �eSchools?�9� � � �A.�No.10� � � �Q.�And I don't want to limit myself, so11� �would you have been advised from any source as12� �to the FTE review process for Buckeye Online13� �School for Success?14� � � �A.�Well, the -- the schools or the reviews15� �are now on an O drive.16� � � �Q.�Yes.17� � � �A.�And if they're completed, they're marked18� �as completed now and you can go on and see most19� �of them.�They're not all on there, but I've20� �seen a number of them on the O drive.21� � � �Q.�Do you make it a point of looking at the22� �final FTE reviews for the other eSchools?23� � � �A.�No.24� � � �Q.�You're aware that they've been posted on

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� �the O drive, however?�2� � � �A.�Some of them have.�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�Separate and apart from�4� �understanding that the FTE review results have�5� �been posted on the O drive, are you otherwise�6� �aware of -- or made aware of the results of the�7� �FTE review of the other eSchools?�8� � � �A.�No.�9� � � �Q.�And so there's been no discussion at any10� �of the area coordination meetings as to the11� �success or lack of success of the 2016 FTE12� �reviews?13� � � �A.�No.14� � � �Q.�When's the last time there was such a15� �meeting?16� � � �A.�Over a month ago.17� � � �Q.�Sometime in July after the ECOT review18� �was conducted?19� � � �A.�I can't tell you for sure.�I may have20� �missed one of them because of my vacation21� �schedule.�I think there was one in July.22� � � �Q.�Do you recall whether you attended the23� �one in July?24� � � �A.�No, I don't.

Page 267

�1� � � �Q.�And is it your testimony that the area�2� �coordinators have not been advised by ODE as to�3� �how ODE intends to take the information it's�4� �been provided as part of this FTE reviews and�5� �process it?�6� � � �A.�Yes.�7� � � �Q.�Have any of the area coordinators,�8� �during the course of these meetings, expressed�9� �any disagreement or frustration with the10� �approach being employed by ODE relating to the11� �2016 FTE reviews?12� � � �A.�I would say yes.13� � � �Q.�And in what way has that been14� �communicated, in what -- in what respect?15� � � �A.�I'm just thinking conversations or16� �comments that coordinators would have saying17� �that that's not the way they had done it before18� �or this is -- you know, this is hard to do or19� �things of that nature.20� � � �Q.�So you --21� � � �A.�I can't pinpoint a particular22� �coordinator that -- that I would say -- and what23� �they said exactly.24� � � �Q.�What you -- your recollection from the

Page 268

�1� �comments is that they include that area�2� �coordinators have expressed frustration with ODE�3� �because the standards being applied for the 2016�4� �FTE review are different than what had�5� �historically been applied?�6� � � �A.�There's frustrations with -- with the�7� �process and making sure that they're doing it�8� �correctly.�9� � � �Q.�Did that expression of the frustrations10� �include the fact that there's a new set of11� �standards being applied versus what had been12� �historically applied?13� � � �A.�I'm sure that would be part of it.14� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Why don't we take a break.15� �I need to go consult with my colleague for a16� �second --17� � � � � �MR. COLE:�Okay.18� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�-- about whether certain19� �documents were produced.20� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Off the record.21� � � � � �(Recess.)22� � � � � �THE VIDEOGRAPHER:�Back on the record.23� �BY MR. LITTLE:24� � � �Q.�Sir, the O drive that you placed certain

Page 269

�1� �documents on, who at ODE has access to that?�2� � � �A.�I don't know.�3� � � �Q.�Is it labeled a particular way where�4� �you've placed these documents, such as the ECOT�5� �FTE review?�6� � � �A.�No.�It's FTE -- the O drive is just a O�7� �drive for FTE reviews.�8� � � �Q.�Okay.�Are there subfiles in that O�9� �drive?10� � � �A.�Yes.11� � � �Q.�And the ECOT report and the other12� �documents you prepared based upon the July FTE13� �review would have been placed in which14� �electronic file?15� � � �A.�The ECOT subfile in the O drive.16� � � �Q.�So does each of the community schools17� �have their own electronic subfile?18� � � �A.�As far as I know.19� � � �Q.�Okay.�I mean, for example, is there20� �one, to your knowledge, for Findlay Digital?21� � � �A.�Yes, there should be.22� � � �Q.�And one for Ohio Virtual Academy?23� � � �A.�Yes.24� � � �Q.�Okay.

�John Wilhelm




�YVer1f

�1� � � �A.�Well, not Ohio Virtual.�We haven't done�2� �one for them --�3� � � �Q.�Okay.�4� � � �A.�-- recently.�This -- this is a pretty�5� �recent thing.�6� � � �Q.�Okay.�So the prior FTE review conducted�7� �for Ohio Virtual Academy in 2012 would not�8� �necessarily be on the O drive?�9� � � �A.�No.10� � � �Q.�The updating or loading of documents on11� �the O drive is of fairly recent vintage?12� � � �A.�Yes.13� � � �Q.�The Findlay Digital final FTE review was14� �conducted when, please?15� � � �A.�I would have done that one in July16� �sometime.�I can't tell you the date.17� � � �Q.�Was that before or after the final ECOT18� �FTE review?19� � � �A.�It would have been after, I believe.20� � � �Q.�And would you have followed a similar21� �approach that after the completion of the22� �Findlay Digital FTE review, you would have23� �prepared the checklist report form and final FTE24� �review letter?

Page 271

�1� � � �A.�Yes.�2� � � �Q.�And were those all completed within ten�3� �days of the completion of the Findlay Digital�4� �2016 FTE review?�5� � � �A.�I would think.�6� � � �Q.�When you conducted the 2016 July FTE�7� �review for ECOT, was Marty Carlisle present from�8� �the auditor's office?�9� � � �A.�There -- I don't think there was an10� �auditor present the day I was there.�That might11� �have been the last day.12� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Okay.�Well, subject to13� �seeing the rest of the documents, that's all I14� �have for you now.�Thank you.15� � � � � �THE WITNESS:�Okay.�Thank you.16� � � � � �MR. LITTLE:�Thank you for your time.17� � � � � �THE WITNESS:�Thanks for the water.18� � � � � � � �(Signature not waived.)19� � � � � � � � � � � � -=O=-20� � � � � � �Thereupon, the testimony of August 29,21� �2016, was concluded at 4:34 p.m.22� � � � � � � � � � � � -=O=-2324

Page 272

�1� � � � � � � � � � �CERTIFICATE�2� �STATE OF OHIO� � � :� � � � � � � � � � � � � �SS:�3� �COUNTY OF FRANKLIN :�4� � � � � � �I, Rhonda Lawrence, a Notary Public in� � �and for the State of Ohio, duly commissioned and�5� �qualified, do hereby certify that the� � �within-named JOHN WILHELM was first duly sworn�6� �to testify to the truth, the whole truth, and� � �nothing but the truth in the cause aforesaid;�7� �that the testimony then given was reduced to� � �stenotypy in the presence of said witness,�8� �afterwards transcribed; that the foregoing is a� � �true and correct transcript of the testimony;�9� �that this deposition was taken at the time and� � �place in the foregoing caption specified.10� � � � � � � �I do further certify that I am not a11� �relative, employee or attorney of any of the� � �parties hereto; that I am not a relative or12� �employee of any attorney or counsel employed by� � �the parties hereto; that I am not financially13� �interested in the action; and further, I am not,� � �nor is the court reporting firm with which I am14� �affiliated, under contract as defined in Civil� � �Rule 28(D).15� � � � � � � �In witness whereof, I have hereunto16� �set my hand and affixed my seal of office at� � �Columbus, Ohio, on this 30th day of August,17� �2016.1819202122� � � � � � � � � � �Rhonda Lawrence23� � � � � � � � � �Notary Public, State of Ohio.24� �My commission expires:�October 8, 2018

�John Wilhelm




�

�John Wilhelm


Exhibits

Exhibit 20 (2-sided) 63:9 67:6

Exhibit 34 (2-sided) 168:12,20

Exhibit 35 (2-sided) 94:5 165:23

Exhibit 44 (2-sided) 147:20,21 149:16 154:7 157:24

Exhibit 46 (2-sided) 157:5



Exhibit 56 (2-sided) 204:6,7 205:6,9 211:11, 12,16


Exhibit 59 (2-sided) 218:3,6,7


Exhibit 67 (2-sided) 223:11,12 257:20 259:6 262:16,24 263:8

Exhibit 68 227:4,20

Exhibit 69 230:22 231:23



Exhibit 83 (2-sided) 238:24 239:2

Exhibit 149 32:19 33:8,9, 16 37:18,24 38:22 39:24 47:8 63:11 155:13

Exhibit 155 89:22 92:20

Exhibit 156 261:11

-

-=O=- 155:1,4,8 271:19,22

1

1 13:22,23 14:2,8,10 21:23,24 23:3,6,22 24:4,6 43:15 67:6 71:12 74:14 90:4 148:12 208:11 229:2

1,000 15:2

10 11:17

100 139:1,6

105 245:6,21 246:4

105-hour 74:17 119:12

11 8:5,12 9:2 17:20 107:6, 8 108:8,18 109:14,24 168:24

11th 45:2

12 158:2

12:21 155:3

12th 157:10 163:16

13 207:6

14 95:18,20 107:9 108:4, 19 195:8

149 32:19 33:7,9,16 37:18, 24 38:22 39:24 47:8 63:11 155:13

15 11:17 78:13 95:13,24 96:5 97:4,13 98:4,8,12,15, 18 99:3,7,12 104:4 125:9 126:15 152:6 164:19 166:2,10 167:1,10 168:3 170:4 172:9,10 174:13 204:9 211:15

15-'16 166:12,13,20

150 105:22 106:5 186:6 206:24 243:22

154 89:19,20

155 89:22 92:20

156 261:11

16 8:12 9:2 17:20 36:10 78:2 87:9,12 96:6 97:4,14 98:4,6,7,12,15 99:3,5,12, 16 100:5 118:9 166:2,10, 15,16,18 167:1 225:1

17 198:2 223:12 224:3,18 225:5 226:8,13 257:23

170 105:22 106:5

17th 165:7 263:13

18 202:1

19 227:6 228:18 230:13 234:18

1:25 155:7

1:28 45:22

1A 69:17,21 70:5 73:9 74:1

1B 70:5

1C 70:5

2

2 42:18 70:10 72:22,24 89:23 148:12 187:23 247:23

20 63:9 67:6 174:12 213:16 214:10 215:6 221:22 223:15 231:24 263:23

2000 156:18 189:13

2006 168:1 172:2 183:3

2008 12:21,22 13:2,3,4,9, 12 15:12 16:10,16 17:9 19:21 20:8 21:2 22:15 24:19 25:10,14 26:14 31:22 48:8 59:23 205:24

2011 17:12,22 35:2 37:4,9, 16 38:1 40:17 41:9,13 42:11 43:6 44:24 45:22 46:18 48:21 49:1,15,23 50:5,13,15 51:13 54:20 55:1 56:9 57:7 58:5 59:2, 17 60:5,9,15,16 61:1,10, 15 62:20 63:6 64:12,24 65:6 66:3,10,24 67:2,18 68:5,18 69:1,6,15 70:4 73:7,23 74:8,19 155:17 156:7,20 189:7 244:6,13, 14,15,22 247:17

2012 17:12 60:21 270:7

2015 34:2 37:12 39:18 40:6 63:12 77:21 78:6 79:13,16 85:21 86:13,21 89:12,23 91:15,22 92:4,9, 16 99:23 100:2,18,20 103:12 104:23 127:6 136:19 155:13 167:15 168:9,13,19 169:5,22 170:2,6 171:8,14,22 172:5,14,19 173:2,13

174:1,4,15 175:4 183:3, 12,17 187:9,13 192:16 209:4 210:4,23 211:4 213:18 221:3,6 225:2,8 226:20 234:1 237:16,22 238:6,12 244:14 247:22 256:18

2015-16 114:16

2015-2016 100:21 111:10, 19 114:7 115:9 117:2 118:4,12 127:21 150:12 153:12 229:12 230:16

2016 17:22 28:22,23 29:17 30:4,16 36:9 37:4,9,16 38:3 39:14 40:4 75:2,9,20 76:8 78:16 79:8,18 80:3, 12,24 82:23 83:17 84:16 87:5 88:7 90:9,19 94:8,13 95:10 97:2,10,14 98:1,9 99:22 101:1,22 102:10 103:12 104:8,11,17,23 112:5,19 113:17 114:2 115:4 116:13 120:3 125:14 126:12,13,19 127:9 128:9,19 129:9 130:20 131:5 132:13 133:2 136:6,10 144:13 145:17 146:11 147:22 148:3 149:18 150:6,9,18, 24 155:5 156:24 157:10, 20,22 158:3,9 160:19 161:5 164:9,11,12,16 165:1,12,15 166:8,11,23 167:2,6,9,14,22 168:1,7 171:6,11,19 172:3,11,24 173:13,22 174:2,18,24 175:8 189:15,23 192:17, 24 193:19 194:13,18 196:17 198:2 202:1 204:9 207:6 212:7 213:16,23 215:6 218:8 219:22 221:11,22 222:7 223:15 224:3 225:5 226:8,13 227:1,6 230:13,18 231:3, 24 232:7 233:8,12,21,24 234:18 236:18 237:11,16, 20 238:2 240:19 245:16 247:21 248:8 254:21 256:10,22 257:23 258:7 262:2 263:23 264:7 266:11 267:11 268:3 271:4,6,21

2016-2017 111:15 151:12 152:9,13,20,24 153:7

20th 222:7 262:17 263:11



i1

�John Wilhelm


21 212:6 213:22 218:8 236:2,17

22nd 157:22

24 168:15,24 169:9 171:13,22 172:5,19 173:1, 13

25 106:7,19 107:6 108:20 110:16 138:20 139:6

27 145:16 147:22 148:3 149:18 150:9,18,24 157:20 158:9 240:19

29 155:5 271:20

2A 70:24

2C 71:17

2nd 91:19,22 92:4,9,16 160:19 161:5 219:22 220:6

3

3 61:10 62:17 148:12,16 149:7

30 58:4 138:20

30th 34:2

31 43:13

31st 45:13

3377 157:11

338 95:6,15

34 168:12,20

35 94:5 165:23

36 40:20,21 45:19 47:18 52:6

37 55:22 56:2

38 61:4,9

39 63:4 66:7,8

3:22 41:13

4

4 41:9,13 56:9

40 15:5

42 30:1,22 31:6 83:15 89:5

43 145:11,15

44 147:20,21 149:16 154:7 157:24

46 92:18 93:1 157:5

47 91:7,24 92:1 164:21

480 58:11,15

4:34 271:21

4th 239:12,21 240:16 258:20

5

5 44:24 45:3,4 91:15 236:24

50 201:12

500 72:15 137:22

5076 154:12

56 204:6,7 205:6,9 211:12, 16

58 212:4,24

59 218:3,6,7

6

6 45:22 90:5 236:24

600 186:5 190:10 206:22 243:20

61 219:20

63-page 170:10

6371 41:1,3 44:23

67 223:11,12 257:20 259:6 262:16,24 263:8

68 227:4,20

69 230:22 231:23

7

7 236:24

70 234:14,15

750 138:2 140:15 185:14, 15 186:5 195:21 196:3,10 206:21 244:1 254:19 255:4,22 256:10,21

79 235:23

7th 45:8

8

8263 56:22

83 238:24 239:2

87 67:7

88 63:14

9

9 118:7,8

920 163:23 180:14 254:15, 23 256:6

9:00 43:12

A

a.m. 43:12

Aaron 25:4,7 36:13,18 100:10 120:12 164:18

Abby 21:7 22:1 175:23 176:5 179:18 236:13,17 239:17 246:20 248:18

Abby's 21:10 248:18

ability 38:19 125:8 160:21 161:16 177:11 180:16 185:5 250:14

Academy 16:23 17:1,11 60:22,23 104:22 105:7 117:8 151:24 152:3,17,19 153:5,10,17 154:3 269:22 270:7

access 55:13,19 67:24 122:9 243:18 244:1 269:1

accessed 169:17

accessible 55:18

accessing 106:16 108:17

accompanied 61:14

accurate 7:1 87:2 158:3,5 206:12

act 178:13

acting 88:15

action 54:14 89:16 129:8 224:1

activities 93:8,11 216:10, 18

actual 13:13 29:11 229:4, 10

added 14:7

addition 8:7 20:4 23:3 26:6 39:2 44:10,11 158:22 200:2

additional 14:6,7 65:11 72:3,9 149:10 159:15 185:18 207:2 233:17 242:22 245:14

Additionally 149:8

additions/suggestions 96:4

address 97:3 224:2

addressed 86:16 250:6

adequate 129:15

adequately 83:1

adjustment 131:19 132:10 182:13

adjustments 131:10 134:2,3,5 182:16

administrative 18:20 64:5 70:18

administrator 12:23 13:2 32:6 169:14

admonition 80:18

advance 186:9

adverse 119:13 133:5

advice 242:2,8,9,14,18 243:3,5

advise 77:20 78:7 99:2 146:15,21 172:12 204:13, 22 229:8 233:14 236:22 239:23

advised 46:13 78:16 90:12,17 100:9 101:15 104:12,16 151:23 153:1,8 173:12 210:2 241:6 249:22 265:5,11 267:2

advising 44:2 105:10 150:18 173:18 239:5

afternoon 43:15 125:11 155:6 220:5 243:15

agree 98:15 108:6 136:13 137:7 172:6 229:15



i2

�John Wilhelm


agreement 34:15 38:21 39:10,19,22 40:7,10,17 45:10,11 46:4,9,14,16,19 47:2,7,19,22 48:9,13 49:5, 17,24 50:7,15,20 51:2,7, 12,15,18 52:7,9 54:6,19 55:2,12 63:10 67:6 69:18 70:6,11 71:12 72:23 73:10,13 74:2,15 100:7 134:6 155:14,17,21 156:1, 7,19

ahead 116:9 122:24 125:6 142:14 167:15 185:21 186:6 235:3 239:18

alerted 52:24 53:7

Alice 21:7 176:6,7,9 212:6 236:1,13,17 239:3,17

allowed 7:6 73:16 245:19

ambiguities 237:9

ambiguity 180:3,8,15

amount 18:9 106:22 132:10 164:5 195:13 208:12 215:21

amounts 189:3

analysis 138:10

and/or 63:22 173:14 195:3

annual 16:7

answering 15:24

answers 182:6

anticipate 43:13

anticipated 259:23

anticipation 231:2

apologize 33:9 225:14

apparently 81:6 165:6

appearance 210:11

appeared 169:4 243:15

appears 58:15 145:19 201:24

applicable 103:23 116:6, 20 152:13 153:1

application 138:13,15 247:16

applied 60:14,16 126:8 127:20 132:14 134:10

137:2,3,14 138:6 152:19 167:2,23 170:2 184:3,16 189:7 238:5,11 268:3,5, 11,12

applies 93:21

apply 107:23 127:24 174:1,4 183:2,12,17,21,22

applying 82:21 120:4

approach 6:17 77:23 78:21,24 132:14,23 133:24 134:9 139:1 175:7 186:12 207:8 267:10 270:21

approved 169:12

April 56:9 204:9 211:15 212:6 213:16,22 214:10 215:6 218:8 221:11,22 222:6 223:14 262:17 263:10,23

Apryl 165:6,10

area 6:11 12:18 13:5,13, 16,20 14:11,24 15:11 17:3 18:2 19:4 21:14,20 22:2, 24 23:4,19 25:10 27:17,24 28:4 29:2,6 31:9,15 32:10 42:17 74:20 75:3,20 76:7, 13 84:15,24 85:11 86:5,7, 13,22 89:7 90:4,5 100:13, 14 111:24 112:7,14 113:1, 13,20 114:5,14 115:21 116:2 119:17,19 124:23 125:22 127:7 137:15 142:18 143:3,8,12,13,14, 24 157:20 160:19 164:1 167:24 176:24 182:14 187:23 201:7,16,17 220:12 264:15 266:10 267:1,7 268:1

areas 13:8,11 196:13

arrangements 7:14 59:6

arrive 43:12

arrived 185:16 186:7

assert 242:13

assess 75:21

assessed 82:16

assessing 203:10

assessment 128:11

assigned 13:20 14:1 86:8

assignment 68:21 69:3,8 70:2

assist 15:17 16:5 19:3,16 23:19 42:8,20 193:15 214:7 246:21

assistance 23:11 106:3

assistant 27:13

assisted 24:3 212:22 213:12

assisting 18:24 20:11 43:21

assume 133:21 258:16

assumed 22:1 189:19

assuming 137:3

assumption 133:2 173:4

attach 34:11

attached 39:22 47:7 59:20 63:11 81:3 91:6 92:19 149:9 204:12 205:5 209:11 211:11 212:9 220:17

attaching 148:5

attachment 91:12,23 158:13,17

attempt 43:11 106:12 111:7 247:19

attempted 106:10

attend 27:16 243:13

attendance 119:2,6 148:24 208:11,19

attended 266:22

attending 19:11

attention 40:23 51:14 53:21 55:3 63:13 87:24 91:24 95:6 130:17 149:8 169:9 172:18 212:3 215:7 250:6

attorney 12:2

attorney/client 242:13

attorneys 11:24

audit 63:21 130:12,23 132:2 163:3,5,6 195:23 196:1

audited 101:16 114:7 118:3 131:4 132:1 142:9

151:12

auditing 45:15 174:6

auditor 61:19,24 62:4,8, 12,14 271:10

auditor's 271:8

audits 130:20 232:6,11,15

August 61:10 62:17 155:5 257:6 271:20

author 205:13

authorized 222:4

authorizing 219:15

auxiliary 15:22 17:24 18:6 19:2 25:24 160:11

availability 191:4 192:5

average 16:13

aware 45:9 47:10 48:11 66:22 71:9 82:4 87:5,12 102:17 103:8 111:23 112:7 126:21 127:3,4,12 132:7,24 138:8 144:14 150:8,16 171:4,6,9,21 172:4 179:3 193:12,18 203:12 226:18 234:13 250:11 264:17,21,24 265:24 266:6

awareness 50:11 102:6, 9,11,14 123:18

B

B-e-n-t-a-h-i-r 41:17

Babal 89:24 90:24 91:18 92:16 187:24 188:3,5 219:18 251:13

back 13:17 19:10 41:4 45:21 62:9 67:5 71:11,14 89:2 95:6,18 98:20 100:7 126:17 130:6 155:9 172:8 188:21 195:14 196:10 199:15 201:4 203:2 235:7 257:19 262:10 268:22

backing 181:6

balance 208:7

ballpark 152:3

Barnes 147:23

based 50:10 57:17 77:20 84:4 119:5 137:16 139:19



i3

�John Wilhelm


140:10 146:13 158:10 159:18 160:23 163:23 170:12 181:24 183:15 184:8,9 187:1 189:6 198:7 202:16 211:24 213:17 221:2 229:2 241:23 244:5, 12,20 247:6 248:7 252:2 256:18 258:15 269:12

basic 126:11,18 170:17 195:5 214:16

basically 59:13 203:22 214:14

basing 168:11,14

basis 14:24 16:7 107:13 110:4 121:22 153:4 170:20 193:3 233:24

Bates 40:24 44:23 56:21 63:14 67:7 95:14 154:11

Bear 203:15 218:3

begin 6:16 7:5,7,18 40:22 68:11 73:2,9 229:7

behalf 189:22 197:1

believed 53:14,17 55:5 83:6 135:22

benefit 256:7 259:4

big 147:6 195:15 196:14

biggest 19:5 208:4

bimonthly 22:11,12

birth 196:7 245:10 247:12

bit 18:3 59:13 140:8 152:6 160:12 189:21 214:16 220:23

blame 260:3

bland 209:11

blank 117:22

blended 25:16 84:6,20 146:4,15 193:8

block 14:15

bluntly 114:22

bold 163:17 262:21

border 14:13

bottom 41:7,11 45:21 146:2

break 7:13 88:20,23 89:4 154:21 156:23 200:24

268:14

Brian 22:10,13

brick-and-mortar-type 118:23

briefed 77:11

bring 55:2

bringing 109:15

Brittny 260:13,14

broaden 40:5

broke 89:4

broken 35:8

brought 53:20

Buckeye 264:18 265:12

building 176:21

bullet 146:1 232:17

bullets 145:22

business 240:14

C

calculated 163:22

calculating 201:8

calendar 23:17 28:22,23 30:4 36:9 40:4,5 75:2 90:21

call 19:23 32:6 100:17 149:8 164:17

called 18:19 260:12

Calls 49:18 50:8,21

canceled 103:7

capacity 19:4 24:3 32:10

care 19:17 58:7

Carlisle 271:7

case 10:4 11:24 38:15 40:3 44:10 59:22 62:1 112:13 130:10 131:15 138:18 139:9 140:12 210:1

catastrophic 19:6 20:9, 10

categories 38:5 70:14 71:4 232:11

category 8:11

caution 242:1

CC'D 41:24

Center 32:17 93:5

CERTIFICATE 272:1

certificated 70:17

certificates 196:7 245:11 247:13

certification 195:2 255:24 256:8 260:22

certifications 64:12,17, 23 193:21,23 194:4,11 195:1,2

certified 6:3 64:4

cetera 208:18

chain 47:17

challenge 120:3

chance 61:6

change 83:23 84:2 102:4 141:13 147:7 168:4 232:23 234:4 235:4

changed 13:12 59:13 103:7

charter 16:8,12,15

chartered 15:19

chatting 156:22

check 66:24 91:8 92:6,11 234:11 259:19

checked 66:24 73:17 90:2

checking 247:11,12

checklist 96:3 168:14,24 169:3,6,7,8,10,22 170:3, 21 171:1,7 173:1 199:11 208:23 220:1,19,20,24 221:2,5,6,8 248:11 249:4, 12 259:21 270:23

checklists 219:12

choice 146:7 233:6

Chris 90:24 187:24 188:3 219:17 232:24 251:13,17 259:20 260:4

Christopher 89:23

Cincinnati 201:17

circumstances 77:8 252:6

claimed 244:8,24

clarification 6:20,22 7:9 44:20 56:3 72:2 78:5 236:18

classify 31:10

classroom 176:20

clear 73:12,18 75:12 96:13 237:1

clerical-type 141:11

close 107:6

closing 117:11,13

Cody 27:9 33:23,24 36:14, 18 78:1,7 80:23 81:9 91:7 115:19 120:9,16 148:2 162:12,22 178:4,11 199:16 202:15 204:18 206:8 218:16 219:15 222:19 227:13 235:24 236:14,18 239:2,18 241:9, 24 250:22

Cole 9:11,17,22 10:1,3,18, 24 11:2 21:15 30:5 32:22 33:2,7,10,13 41:3 46:22 49:18 50:1,8,21 51:21 53:22 57:9 61:5 66:7 69:10 73:11 88:19 92:22 93:2 112:21 114:10,20 116:7 125:3 126:24 130:22 142:12 144:21 159:9 162:18 165:17,20 170:9 171:23 178:17 199:17,20 201:1 242:1,12 254:9 259:23 260:5 268:17

Cole's 12:4

colleague 268:15

colleagues 12:4 190:1

collect 111:2 191:23

collected 106:18 135:18 186:14 199:8

collection 186:18

Columbus 22:11,13 24:9, 12,15 25:9 55:18

comfort 7:12

comfortable 6:17



i4

�John Wilhelm


commencement 17:3,13 19:20 25:21 26:8 111:18

commencing 31:21

comment 196:2 210:14 238:7 253:17

commented 210:10,15 255:23 256:3

comments 62:22 92:15 194:21 220:20 250:1 259:12 267:16 268:1

commitments 19:7

communicate 7:2 57:21 111:9 139:20 146:3 156:6, 11 198:6 210:21 216:8 217:19

communicated 58:4 84:15 89:7 99:15 100:1 102:3 103:22 110:20 111:17 112:3 115:7 127:13 156:17 161:21 162:10 164:15 172:23 173:6 181:18 182:1 197:19 204:19 211:3,8 223:19 226:8,9 232:14 267:14

communicating 54:4,11 150:18 200:9,18,20

communication 150:8 161:11 197:4 223:18

communications 102:1 103:16 104:11 147:1 150:15,17 155:19,24 156:24 175:10,19 179:1 197:12 211:19 217:16 231:2 237:7 250:12,16 259:24 261:14

community 15:18,22 23:21 25:12,20 31:23 32:1,8 35:9,11,14 44:1 48:6 56:12 57:21 59:24 61:22 62:13 72:2,9 81:19, 22 82:1,5,10,14,20 85:1 86:15,24 91:13,14 94:6 99:2 100:21 101:3,10 102:7,16 116:6,20,24 118:3,13,19 119:4,14 174:5 179:6 208:9 233:4 264:22 269:16

comparable 60:1 229:21

compare 160:23

compared 98:18,20

compile 247:7

compiling 247:9

complete 16:3 105:17 198:13 224:21,24 225:7 248:15 249:5,8 252:12

completed 16:6 108:23 109:5,11,12 249:6,11,16 254:8 258:16,24 265:17, 18 271:2

completing 57:4 231:15

completion 68:20 69:2,7 199:5 205:18,20 248:7 249:10 270:21 271:3

compliant 141:16

complimented 194:21

comply 122:3 123:22,24 209:4

component 198:9

composed 8:17 33:19 211:24 212:10,12,16

comprise 108:19

computer 55:19 67:14 69:4 74:5,9,22 83:24 84:18,24 86:15,24 106:23 107:12 151:2 153:24 164:2 193:17 195:3,4 208:14

computers 245:22

con 231:6

concern 120:5,6 124:1 127:22,23 128:3,17,18 177:7

concerned 123:20

concerns 129:3 160:21 161:15 162:13,16,19 177:11,15,21 178:2,12,13 188:17 192:4 196:20,23 197:5 198:18 199:1 202:10 220:10,15 251:21

conclude 247:24

concluded 107:2 256:13, 19 271:21

conclusion 49:19 50:9,22 184:13,14,17 194:18 196:16 246:17 254:21 255:2,20 256:8

conclusions 57:17 124:19 194:20 254:4 259:11

concrete 182:11

conditions 72:19

conduct 23:9 24:7,8 25:19 26:10,19 29:21 31:5 50:18 53:19 54:15,23 55:7 65:15 77:22 90:8 140:14 174:18 175:8,12 180:21 233:20 240:21,22 241:23

conducted 16:11,16 17:10,15,22 22:14 25:13 27:2,7 30:21 35:4,15 48:7, 24 49:22 50:5,10 51:13 53:16 56:12 59:23 62:19 69:6 75:1,6,7,19 78:8,18 80:19 82:18 83:4 87:5 90:14 105:23 117:1 130:19 132:15 134:12,20 136:6 137:8,18 139:10 141:15 153:16 157:1 166:12,15 167:8 170:1 174:12 175:12 178:9 184:24 188:12 197:23 216:10 233:15 241:2,3 246:17 258:15 266:18 270:6,14 271:6

conducting 23:20 24:14 42:20 43:5 44:3 49:11,13, 15 50:17 60:8,14 70:3 90:17 94:1 100:19,20 124:13,20 137:2,11 139:2, 16 149:1 152:20 171:15 174:2 176:13 181:2 207:11 208:1 233:24 244:4,20

conducts 24:24

conference 188:13 194:17 196:18 231:7

conferencing 208:17

confirm 89:19 126:20 157:21

confirmation 67:1

confirmed 196:12

confusion 90:7 102:21

conjunction 94:22 97:5

connected 52:18

connection 67:22

consensus 112:15,24 113:7,9

consequence 133:5

consequences 129:16 134:15,18 137:5 181:11 182:2,21

consideration 105:7

considered 73:1,8,24 74:7 105:14 177:24

consist 8:2

consistent 43:19 49:16 54:21 55:5 83:9 88:10,12 96:11 144:11 159:15 184:24 207:7

consists 8:3 40:21

constructed 252:18

consult 268:15

contact 146:7,14 232:20, 21 236:14,19,23

contacted 40:12 146:21

contacting 236:3

contained 46:19 64:13,23 65:5,12 67:17 137:22 158:13,17

content 96:9 211:18 214:13 215:1 261:23

contention 170:21

contentions 228:2

contents 39:9 205:13 206:8 211:24 244:3,19

context 20:7 27:19 28:14 127:24

contexts 20:5 27:22 28:6, 10

continue 108:15

continued 177:10 180:2

continues 46:6

contract 34:13,14 148:15, 18,22

convenience 148:9

conversation 53:12 161:5,7 173:17 175:15

conversations 127:6 177:4 267:15



i5

�John Wilhelm


convinced 135:21

coord 143:11

coordinate 91:2

coordinating 236:6

coordination 86:22 264:16 266:10

coordinator 6:11 12:18 13:5,17 15:1,11 17:4 18:2 19:4 21:14,20 22:2 25:11 27:17,24 28:5 29:2,6 31:10,15 32:10 42:17 76:13 86:14,22 100:13,14 102:19,20 111:24 112:14 113:13,21 114:6 115:21 118:8 119:17 143:4 157:20 160:19 177:1 182:15 187:24 201:16 264:16 267:22

coordinators 23:1,5,20 74:20 75:4,20 76:8 81:6 84:15 85:12 86:5,8 89:7 99:2 112:8,16 114:14 115:12 116:2 119:19 121:8 124:23 125:22 127:7 134:4 137:15 142:18 143:9,12,13,15 164:1 167:24 220:12 267:2,7,16 268:2

copied 42:4 61:19 164:22 238:24 240:1 261:11

copies 123:13 145:3 189:15

copy 26:6 29:11 30:2 32:21 38:14 39:10,18 40:9,16 45:11,12,13 46:16 47:2 50:14 52:8 56:5 61:9 63:5,10 81:3 94:13,21 104:3 123:9 148:15 211:9 212:15 218:7 227:5,19

copying 61:23

corner 14:12,14,17 40:24 63:15 95:15

correct 25:2 42:2 57:14 59:3,4 80:7 88:8 105:4 131:14 153:23 154:1 156:20 166:20 183:13,14 195:17 199:4 200:17 208:6 225:22 226:4,6,12, 17,22 229:16 238:14 260:6

correction 66:13 80:23

corrections 213:1

correctly 163:23 268:8

correspondence 56:17 61:10 62:17 91:19 93:12, 17 150:24 157:12 158:2 159:14 175:13 211:15 218:8 219:21 224:3 228:18,22 230:13 231:24 234:18,23 255:3

cost 18:20 19:6

costs 20:9,10

counsel 9:10 261:2,3

count 27:9 28:20 177:9 196:15

counted 195:13

counties 13:15,18 14:7, 13

counting 104:15,19 105:11

counts 177:8

County 32:16

couple 13:15 20:10 103:7 175:21 198:20

court 6:24

cover 33:17,18,21 61:14 104:17 118:7 209:11 211:12

covers 14:10 214:22

crafting 253:11

create 206:12

created 122:6 214:13

creation 152:12

credit 71:2 131:18 136:23

credits 130:2,5,15 131:7 139:22

criteria 74:14

curious 164:22

curriculum 67:24 68:11, 14

cursory 196:8

cut 82:6 215:2

cycle 17:19 18:12 20:15, 16,19

cycles 20:14

D

D-e-w-a-r 21:11

daily 107:13

data 109:19 115:3,15 127:17 135:17 182:3 191:24 199:7 211:12

date 34:1 44:9 68:14 69:14 74:12 148:3 221:22 270:16

dated 41:8 45:22 223:14 236:1,17 262:17 263:10

dates 44:16,17 148:7 154:16 156:2 186:5 240:22

day 43:16 105:24 106:24 111:6 186:7 191:9 207:1 213:9 215:16 229:4 241:13,19 243:3,6,21 246:19 247:2,5 261:8 271:10,11

days 9:20 15:7,8 23:17 119:2,3 185:21 186:9,20 203:1,5 207:2,3 209:10 236:12,15 243:24 248:17, 19 249:9 258:21 260:16 261:5 271:3

days' 186:17,24 240:14

deal 195:15

deals 82:6

dealt 137:23 182:18

December 207:19

decided 117:16

decision 89:15 150:5 182:17

decisions 182:11

declined 195:4

dedicated 14:24

deeming 229:11

Defendant's 32:19

deferred 125:1,24 261:2

deficiencies 136:13

delay 222:9 223:2

delays 221:12,17

delivered 74:5 195:3

delivery 67:14 68:10,13, 15

demonstrate 180:17

demonstrated 215:19

denying 64:22

department 6:12 12:20 22:17 29:19 30:19 31:4,22 47:23 48:10,14 77:12 113:16,24 121:5 128:16 129:11 130:7,9,16 136:8 137:24 142:2,11,13 144:12 161:18 162:6 173:7 174:9,17 175:6 176:24 188:1 193:6,14 229:18 232:10 233:3 241:4,12

department's 88:10,13, 16 112:17 153:13

Depends 23:12

deploy 44:3

deployed 121:6

deposes 6:3

deposition 6:13 7:21 9:4, 7 11:5 12:1,9

describe 15:15 26:4 31:24 151:1

describing 214:15

designation 13:21

desk 163:2,5,6 195:22 196:1 232:6,11,15

detail 18:4 123:8 154:14 160:22 163:7 186:3

detailed 81:7 220:19

details 62:23

Detention 93:5

determination 182:21 245:20

determinations 141:2

determine 97:17 184:11 222:14 228:16 234:22 245:4,5 246:7

determined 133:17



i6

�John Wilhelm


determining 69:18 71:1

develop 217:5,13 225:19 257:3,7 258:2

developed 193:6,14 217:21,24

developing 217:17

development 226:10

Dewar 21:7,11 22:6 23:4 175:23 176:6 179:11 187:20 212:6,10,15 236:1, 9,17 239:3,17 240:4 246:20

Dewar's 176:5,10

Diana 204:10

Diane 11:9 241:9,19

dictate 15:9

difference 255:24

differences 259:13

differing 62:2

difficult 64:16 97:17 110:21 121:13,15,20 122:3 128:6,7 190:7 192:13

difficulty 108:16 111:20 112:10 124:2

Digital 16:23 17:7,15 20:14 60:4,9,15,24 103:11,20 105:18,21 106:8,11 107:9 108:2,9, 10,24 109:4,13,16,23 110:1,20,22 111:9 112:3 115:1 116:23 138:10 147:5 151:8 252:10 253:14,16,20 269:20 270:13,22 271:3

direct 22:7 63:12 212:3 215:6

directed 204:16 219:10

directing 40:23

direction 53:4 237:1

directions 54:7 62:2 83:10 146:13 148:2 154:13

directly 32:11 46:21 75:17 172:21 178:21 204:20 205:2 228:9

director 27:13

disadvantage 256:14

disagreement 119:18 267:9

disclosed 224:4

disclosure 155:16

discontinue 101:21

discuss 227:15,24 242:17 243:8

discussed 85:15 87:1 167:7

discussion 9:14 76:12 85:3,6,12 102:7 108:10 113:14 162:11 179:4,5 235:15 243:10 266:9

discussions 31:9 89:11 98:24 100:16 102:15,18 103:5,8,10 104:21 105:5, 12 109:23 111:24 114:5 121:1,7,10 126:4 134:24 143:23 153:11 162:15 179:7 202:9 216:2 221:16 223:24 224:7,11 226:14 231:13

disseminated 101:9

distinction 108:18 242:10

distributions 133:9

district 17:2 18:8 19:11, 12,15,24 20:2 21:21 101:14 114:24 122:17 123:12,21 151:14,18 208:5

districts 16:3 18:7 19:11 142:21

division 27:14

doc 255:10 262:5

docket 78:13

document 27:9 28:24 29:7 34:17 38:23 39:20,21 40:13 45:7 47:12 48:15 51:17 52:12,19,24 54:21 55:5 57:9 63:14 66:4,17, 21,22 69:24 71:17 72:14 81:11,23 83:20 94:5,17,19 106:21 108:12 157:11 161:16 165:2 170:10,17 189:3 193:1 204:13 209:12 224:22 235:12

238:7,8 255:9,21 256:4 262:1

documentation 8:16 26:17 28:20 35:3 62:21 63:18,24 64:6 65:9,12 67:8,13 68:13,23 70:19 82:6 84:3 107:11 108:3 109:16 110:1,22 112:18 113:16 114:18 115:9 120:8,19 121:17,20 122:4, 6,8,16 128:10 129:15 131:6,13,17 132:4,8,20 133:3,18 135:23 136:16 147:8 150:10,19 154:4 158:14,22 159:15,17 166:10 174:8,15 177:12 180:9 182:22 185:2 188:18,19 189:7 191:1,18 193:2 196:21 197:14 209:3 216:15 219:15 223:20 224:19 226:21 229:4,7,10,11 230:14 237:10 244:7,23 245:12, 14 248:1 254:15,22 257:3, 8

documentations 151:1

documented 160:23 163:18,24 169:12 224:6 255:4 256:20 262:14,20 264:3,9

documenting 110:24 113:5 193:16

documents 10:9,22 11:13 66:9 67:2 69:16 70:24 97:7,9 108:17 125:8 136:4 141:11 144:11 148:8,10 175:5 176:4 205:2 208:15 215:19 219:16 237:21 245:1,9,10 248:12 249:17 250:2 259:15 268:19 269:1,4,12 270:10 271:13

Don/estelle 90:5

doubt 237:1

Doug 32:20 33:5 73:17 165:19 259:19

draft 204:13 206:15,17 207:11 216:23 218:11 221:8 254:2,10 257:5,12 258:5

drafted 205:11 213:4,5, 16,22 214:2,24 221:22 223:8 253:24 262:10

263:4 264:6

drafting 86:1 212:23 213:13

drafts 253:4

drastic 141:10

draw 124:19 169:9 185:20

drawing 117:22

drawn 185:12

drill 140:7

drive 219:12 248:23 249:7,19 253:24 265:15, 20 266:1,5 268:24 269:6, 7,9,15 270:8,11

duly 6:2

duration 76:14 77:9 106:13 110:4 113:5 170:8 197:16 201:8 257:9

durational 74:21,22 75:5, 12 78:22 79:6,12,17,21,23 80:5 83:5 87:15 88:5 94:24 95:1 96:13 99:18 105:8,13 106:9 111:12 116:5,15 118:20,22 125:15 126:23 127:10 151:2 153:24 168:22 172:13 173:3,14 189:15, 17,24 191:5 193:10 198:1 216:12,19 220:16 246:11 255:14,19 260:24

duties 15:12,16 18:23 230:2

dwell 195:18

E

Eagle 117:8

earlier 20:13 43:20 60:3 79:22 155:12,15 157:23 162:14 165:16 170:14,18 174:20 192:3 206:2 230:2 244:15 257:24 260:12

earliest 148:9

early 54:20 207:19 209:10 257:6 260:21

earned 65:2,7

easier 257:16

easily 189:10 194:23



i7

�John Wilhelm


198:22

ECOT 8:4,8,20 9:1 16:24 17:20,21 19:19 20:6,9,15, 24 23:13 24:5,8,15 25:1 34:7,21 35:5,6,8,17,21 36:2,6 37:8,16,22 38:11 39:1,10,16,18 41:22 42:11,21 43:6,22 44:24 45:10,14,22 46:7,13,21 47:4,9,11,19,22 48:10,14 49:22 50:5 51:23 52:6 53:3,14 54:13,23 56:8 57:7 58:4 59:3,6 60:8,16, 24 61:11,16 63:14 64:4, 11,18,24 65:4 66:3 67:7, 17 68:3,12 69:19,24 70:4, 6,17 71:2 73:24 74:15 90:3,9,14,18 100:6 103:1, 9 115:2,3 116:24 128:5,6, 9,14,20 129:10 134:13,15 135:19,22 136:3,7,14 139:9,12,16 147:4,23 149:17 150:10,17 152:5 155:15,20 156:1,6,17 157:11,21 158:24 160:20 162:4 175:11,13,20 176:14 177:11,16,23 179:9 180:16 185:7,9,16 186:1,5,19 187:16 188:16 189:8 191:4,22 192:12 194:19 196:18 197:7,12 198:8,19 199:2,8 200:21 201:7 202:16 203:10 204:13 206:24 209:3,19 210:2,22 211:3,8,9 215:8, 17 217:4,13,16,19 218:12 219:4,9 221:2 223:13,20 224:2,4,17,24 225:19 226:9 229:7,9 231:20 233:12,20 235:11 236:3,8, 23,24 237:7,11,14,20 238:2,3,5,11,16 239:7,19 240:14 241:4 251:7,10,12, 22 252:7,20 253:5,11,12, 21,23 254:6,21 255:20 256:9,20 257:2,7 258:2 259:4 260:10,11,14 262:2 266:17 269:4,11,15 270:17 271:7

ECOT'S 24:17 38:2 51:19 63:6 243:16

ed 245:10 247:12

educate 126:1

education 6:12 16:4 19:9 29:19 30:19 31:5,22 47:23

48:10,15 68:12 121:5 129:12 130:7 161:18 162:6 174:10,17 175:6 193:6,14 196:7 241:4

Educational 32:16

effect 264:8

effort 75:18 76:6 228:15 230:5

efforts 76:7

elapsed 245:21

electronic 38:10,13,17 55:16 63:23 67:24 68:1 75:23 76:3 78:13 269:14, 17

electronically 148:11

elements 164:4

elephant 196:14

eligible 136:14

email 33:17,18,21,22 34:1,3,11 39:23 41:7,12, 24 42:23 43:2 44:6,12,21, 24 45:7,19,21 46:3,7,11, 15 47:17 56:16 63:12 89:23 91:22 92:14,16 100:17 145:14 147:22 155:13 157:10 158:13,22 161:7 164:18 173:24 175:13 201:24 202:1 204:10 212:5,10 223:12 227:5 234:16,20 235:24 236:16 239:1 240:1

emailed 29:14 157:20 227:13

emails 28:8 40:22 45:20 52:1 155:15

EMIS 41:22 195:11 208:13

emphasized 79:24

employed 6:10 128:13 231:15 267:10

employee 64:4,6 70:17, 19 260:15

employees 55:12

employment 17:3,14 19:20 20:8 25:22 26:9 31:21

encompass 18:5

encompassing 107:15

encouraged 15:7 217:5 225:19 258:2

end 43:16 154:16

ending 255:17

enforced 184:4,6

engaged 75:17 119:13 180:10,14

engagement 75:14,21 76:9 78:22 80:11 83:6 87:15 88:5 89:8 96:13,24 97:11 98:4,12 106:13,14 108:4 110:4,24 113:6,18 119:8 151:5 153:21 168:23 170:8 193:10 197:16 198:1

engagements 124:18 201:9

English 212:21 213:1

enhancements 163:21

enroll 96:23

enrolled 73:1,8,24 74:11, 13

enrollment 63:21 67:8 91:14 93:6 94:7

ensure 82:19

ensuring 101:15

entered 188:24

entire 15:13 45:13 110:16 138:6 261:4

entirety 26:23

entitled 34:14 51:17 56:24 72:3 74:15 91:12 130:1,4,14 136:22

entity 23:12,13

envision 14:17

equally 7:6

equipment 18:16

equivalents 97:20

errors 58:6,9 163:9 188:22 195:8

eschool 80:12 87:20 95:21 96:1,4 113:22 115:9 122:7 126:21 127:9 132:19 133:2,6,8,10

148:18 151:17 163:21 164:2 166:4 170:3 171:15 208:14 209:9

eschools 16:18,20,21 76:4 78:23 79:12,17 80:5 83:23 84:17,19 87:6,13 93:22 94:2 112:1,10,16 113:2,14 114:6,24 115:7, 15 116:3,21 121:5,16,21 122:3,9 123:3 125:2 126:1,6 137:4 142:8 143:16,21 144:3,9 146:4, 14 151:11 152:23 159:16 160:1,15 170:4 193:7,15 229:21 232:5 265:8,22 266:7

establish 26:18

evaluate 140:18

evaluated 140:3

event 72:4 182:22

events 12:11

every-other-month 22:12 28:4 29:2 144:2

evidence 67:13

exact 118:14 237:2

examination 6:4 77:8

examinations 167:2

examine 116:14

examined 89:9 125:16

examining 20:23 78:21

Excel 164:3

exception 69:23 131:23

exceptions 62:22

excerpts 230:10

exchanges 260:10

excuse 7:10 12:6 14:7 17:12 33:21,24 39:8 43:10 46:18 47:14 48:12 49:13 55:9 69:19 71:14 76:3 77:3,6 78:20 79:11 90:13 91:13 107:4 113:21 143:15 145:10 151:11 156:18 157:10 163:1,16 165:16 178:24 179:9 189:13 192:16 196:24 198:16 200:13 202:14 205:20 209:23 218:20



i8

�John Wilhelm


223:18 224:12 236:2,7 237:8,16 238:3,22 241:2 245:20 251:10 257:17 258:6

exhibit 30:1,22 31:6 32:19 33:8,16 37:11,18,24 38:22 39:24 40:20,21 45:19 47:8,18 52:6 55:22 56:2 61:4,7,9 63:4,9,11 66:8 67:6 83:15 89:5,19,22 92:19,20 94:5,9 95:14 145:15,22 147:20,21 149:16 154:7 155:13 157:5,6,24 164:21,22 165:23 168:12,20 201:12 204:6,7 205:6,9 211:11,16 212:4,5,24 218:3,6,7 219:20 220:3 223:11,12 225:16 227:4,20 230:22 231:23 234:14,15 235:23 238:24 239:2 257:20 259:6 261:11 262:16,24 263:8

exhibits 154:22

exist 136:16 216:5

existed 92:4,9 244:11

existence 46:13

exit 188:13 194:17 196:17 197:13,20,23 198:17 199:2,5 201:6 210:2,9,17, 21 246:16,22

expect 185:9 237:2

expectation 114:4,11,13, 21 115:14 128:8,12,18 129:7 153:5 173:21,24 183:16 191:8,13,16 197:22 198:3,5,7 209:18 217:23 218:1 226:19 237:13,19

expectations 117:12 126:8 153:13

expected 115:5 118:24 182:19 211:8 237:10

expects 81:19

expedite 235:15

experience 31:23,24 124:13,16,20 131:16 176:13,16,18,19 183:16, 20 184:1,15,18,20,23

explain 66:1 101:20 180:11 212:14 236:23

explanation 24:24 93:13 218:22 223:1 251:4

exposure 129:10

express 120:6,20 161:15 173:20 177:10 192:15 196:18

expressed 119:18 120:5 122:2 123:19 124:1,3 126:5 127:22,23 142:8 173:23 191:17 196:23 198:11 199:1 202:10 220:10,15 224:18 267:8 268:2

expressing 120:17

expression 268:9

extent 31:12 131:16 132:19 133:2,16 242:2,14

extra 13:15

extract 109:18

extrapolated 138:6

F

fact 53:1 100:9 114:8 115:14 127:16 128:14,20 130:20 136:18 137:8,13, 21 147:10 167:5,23 183:15 195:19 216:5,18 255:2 268:10

failed 130:12 132:19 255:21

failing 83:1

fails 133:3

fair 55:8 72:17 120:22 122:11 128:11 166:9 181:21 240:4,5,7

fairly 73:18 198:21 202:20 270:11

fairness 177:21

fallen 8:11

familiar 30:11 133:12,15 163:1,2 261:13,19,20

familiarize 157:5

fashion 80:20 81:20 82:11 119:14 240:23 256:3

February 21:7 43:15 157:10,22 158:2 160:19 161:5 163:16 164:12 165:7 202:1

federally 65:9

feel 43:2 81:15

fell 188:24

felt 9:20 178:20

fewer 186:24

field 208:16

fifteen 152:7

figure 137:4 255:14

figures 135:4,8

file 8:15 19:14 35:12,13 38:13,15,17,22,24 39:3,4, 7,9,12 46:19 47:9 55:10, 11,13,16,18 58:7,9 65:24 66:19 70:5,20 197:17 215:11 237:3 269:14

filed 20:10

files 20:9 34:6,19,20,23 35:1,8,20 36:4,6 38:10 45:14 47:3 48:13 57:13 58:11,15,16 63:23 64:11, 13,24 65:6,13 67:12,17 68:4,17,24 70:15 106:6 137:20 138:1,2,17,19 185:17 186:14 190:11,14 191:2 195:21 196:3,10 198:10,20 206:21 215:15 236:22 239:6,20 243:19, 22 244:1,3,11,19

filing 40:2 171:3

fill 46:5

final 12:3 56:14 62:5,13 63:5 66:5,6,14 108:21,22, 23 109:3,6 117:17,19 163:6,13 182:17 206:24 207:5 220:1 227:22 231:3 232:22 234:5 235:10,17 236:7 237:11 246:17 247:1,15 248:8,17 251:6, 11 252:7,9,23 253:5,11 254:5,13,14 260:2 261:14 262:2 265:22 270:13,17, 23

finalized 94:19

finalizing 61:15

finally 93:6

finance 27:15 42:7 94:7

financial 15:19 129:16 133:5 134:14,18 137:5 177:15 182:21

financing 72:10

find 32:21 34:17 35:2 52:11 89:13 92:5,10 97:9 110:6 131:12 137:21 165:8,16 194:23 196:10 198:14 204:12 236:14

findings 141:9 224:18 258:6 259:3

Findlay 16:23 17:6,15 20:14 60:4,9,15,24 103:11,19 105:18,20 106:8,11 107:9 108:2,9, 10,24 109:4,13,16,23 110:1,19,21 111:8 112:3 115:1 116:23 138:10 147:4 151:8 252:10,17 253:14,15,20 269:20 270:13,22 271:3

fine 22:23 28:18 30:14 32:22 33:3 44:22 88:22 116:1 244:17 254:9

finish 7:5,7,10

finished 55:24 157:7 213:9

fiscal 62:20

fiscally 18:14

five-year 18:12 20:19,22

flag 19:24

flags 163:10

flow 19:14

flows 18:7 19:10

focus 51:20 96:23 197:24

focused 91:23

focuses 83:23 84:2

focusing 84:17

folks 200:20 237:7

follow 18:10 39:19,21 44:19 45:18 47:22 95:18 96:2 134:9 186:12 187:3, 12 207:13 234:21 253:16



i9

�John Wilhelm


follow-up 47:16 179:1 222:13

force 86:7,10

forces 86:9

forget 91:4

forgive 263:24

form 8:3 26:16 44:4,11,17 50:1 53:22 56:18 57:1,4, 21 59:10,11,19,20 61:15 62:23 63:5 66:5,6,14 73:11,16 81:1,2,4,9,12,13 133:20 151:7 205:5,10,16, 23 206:2,9,10 209:8 211:10,21 212:1 214:6,12, 14,19,21 215:3,20 217:10 220:18 223:7,18 246:10 247:7 248:4,6,10,14 249:11 252:15,17,22 253:10 261:20 262:1 270:23

formal 31:11 44:21

formally 89:6 241:18

format 38:7 60:1 164:3 209:19 253:21 254:1 261:13 262:9

formatting 259:7

forms 16:2,6 19:13 257:3 261:22

formula 97:19

Forster 61:11

forward 36:11 89:15 127:7 129:9 148:10 218:15,23 224:17 225:1 233:11 239:18

forwarded 34:12 36:15, 17,19,21 37:1 39:17 40:9 209:19 218:11 225:11 227:19 229:22

forwarding 212:15 227:6 230:24 231:18

foster-placed 16:4

found 62:20 91:7 130:10, 13 140:24 141:3 166:2 168:15,23 170:21 173:1 188:21 221:6 257:13 258:4 263:17

foundation 19:15 112:21 159:9 214:24

fourth 264:1

Fox 117:8

frame 33:2 86:19 153:12 164:23 207:7,12 217:13, 16 250:13,17 251:10

Frank 232:20 233:2,3

Fred 201:13

free 43:2

frequency 25:6

Friday 9:23 45:8 220:5

front 33:5 37:24 123:9 145:20 258:9

frustration 267:9 268:2

frustrations 268:6,9

FT 118:12 168:1 172:3

FTE 8:5 12:3 15:21 16:7, 11,15 17:9,14,22 19:18 20:6,16,23 23:9,21 24:8, 15 25:1,12,19,23 26:3,4,7, 10,13,19,20 27:1,2,6 29:21 30:21,22 31:5,6,13 35:1,3,13,14,23 37:2,8,16 38:1,3 39:3,7,8 42:9,20,23 43:6 44:3,8 46:12 48:7,24 49:14,22 50:4 54:15,23 55:7 56:6,11,17,24 57:7, 14,17,20 58:23 59:7,23 60:5,8,15,21 61:14,15,22 62:19,23 63:5,6 64:11 65:15 67:3,18 68:5,18 69:1,5,15,19 70:4,7,11,13 71:2 72:6 73:7,23 74:15, 19 75:1,5,19,21 77:22 78:7,17,23 79:2,5,10 80:19 82:2,18 83:4 84:11, 16 86:1 87:4,7,14 88:6 90:12,13,18 91:6,12 92:5, 10 94:1,6,13 95:10 96:3, 15 97:12,14 98:1,3,9,11, 16 99:17,22 100:20 101:1, 7 103:12 104:17 105:3,15, 17,23 108:21,23 109:3 110:21 111:18 112:5 113:3,17 114:16,19,23 116:13 117:1,11,18 118:12 119:5,10,14 123:15 124:13,16,20 126:23 127:11 128:20 129:14,24 130:2,5,15,19 131:4,7,18,20 132:9,15,20 134:13,21 135:18 136:15, 19,22 137:3,9 138:13,16

139:2,10,22 141:15,23 142:10 143:17,21 144:4, 10,18 146:2,10 148:17 150:12,20 152:8,12,20,24 153:16 154:14 155:17 156:20 157:1,21 158:15, 23 159:1,24 160:22,24 161:13 163:7,17,20 164:7, 16 166:12,18,22,23 167:2, 8,14,15,22 168:2,13,20 169:5,22 170:1,6 171:8, 14,15,20,22 172:3,5,11,19 173:2,13,19 174:1,2,4,11, 15,18,24 175:4,8 176:10, 13,14,18 177:16 180:5 181:19,23 182:13 183:3, 12,17 184:2,4,15,23 185:1,4,7,17 186:2 187:9, 16 188:3,6,12 189:3,9,15, 23 191:17 192:11,17,24 193:19 194:18 195:13 196:12,17 197:1,5,12 200:21 202:12 205:1,10, 18,21 206:12 207:5,11 208:2,8 209:5 210:4,23 211:4,9,20 218:12 219:2, 7,11 220:1 221:3,6,12,18, 21 222:15 223:3 225:1,2, 7,8 227:1,7 229:5,12 230:10,15,18 231:1,3,19 232:7,18 233:8,21 234:1 236:8 237:11,16,17,20,23 238:2,6,12 241:23 243:12 245:13 246:18 247:1,15 248:8,11 249:10,12 250:5 251:6,11 252:7,9,23 253:11 254:5,20 255:10 256:10,18 257:12 258:7 259:22 260:9 261:14 262:2 263:18 264:18,22 265:7,12,22 266:4,7,11 267:4,11 268:4 269:5,6,7, 12 270:6,13,18,22,23 271:4,6

FTES 60:19 85:13 133:4 141:7 160:23 163:22 183:3 184:20 223:22 224:5,20 244:8,24 255:3, 5,7

full-time 21:14,20 22:2,24 97:19 187:24

fully 184:4,6

funding 20:23 34:14 38:20 39:10,18,22 40:6, 10,16 45:9 46:4,9,14,18 47:2,6,19,21 48:9,12 49:4,

16,24 50:7,15,20 51:2,7, 12,15,17,18 52:7,8 54:6, 19 55:2,12 63:10 65:11 67:6 69:17,20 70:6,7,11 71:12 72:3,12,23 73:2,8, 10,13 74:2,7,15,16 119:5, 15 131:10,20 132:9,21 133:16 136:15,22 155:14, 16,21 156:1,6,19 160:1,15 229:12 230:15 233:5 256:11

funds 26:1 129:11 130:15 133:9

future 133:9,10 197:15 217:21 229:8 257:8

FY11 7:24 8:3 195:5 240:10

FY15 98:6 100:8 208:8

FY16 7:24 8:6 146:5 158:23 160:22

FYE 8:12 9:2

G

gather 108:15 136:3 192:13

gathered 199:9 213:10 248:17

gathering 192:9

gave 186:4,20

general 15:24 38:24 39:2, 4,9,12 47:9 55:11 77:24 106:14 112:12 121:10 145:5 149:1 190:5 194:21 235:13,14,16

generally 30:7 151:1

geographic 13:13

geographical 13:8 14:11

get all 111:5

give 18:3 51:16 117:5 126:9 127:18 165:11 186:12,17,24 202:19 214:11 232:24 239:20 241:7 243:2 250:24 252:1

giving 53:4

glean 237:3

glitches 195:12



i10

�John Wilhelm


going-forward 193:3

good 6:6 77:10 88:20 118:17 195:6 196:11,13 208:5 214:19 236:21

grades 65:2,7,24 71:6

Great 117:11

greater 165:11

gross 16:11

grounds 10:20

group 99:11 115:16 125:21 142:7,17 197:2,5, 6,12

guess 97:20 115:24 153:17 173:16 189:20 216:17 222:19 227:13 234:6

guessing 34:5,8 38:24 203:1 249:14

guidance 31:3 165:11 224:23 233:17

guidelines 193:7,15 239:8

guts 214:16

H

H-e-i-t-m-e-y-e-r 21:18

half 36:8 85:9,16,17 153:6 207:2 247:3

hand 32:18 63:4 168:13

handbook 26:4,7,19,20 27:2 29:22 31:8,13 91:13, 14 208:9 226:24

handbooks 25:23 26:1,2 30:22 31:7

handed 235:14

handful 198:19

handicap 72:20

handicapping 72:19

handicaps 71:19 72:18

handle 133:11

handled 24:2

happen 134:24

happened 78:11 158:6

234:7

happening 77:13

happy 260:3

hard 124:2 267:18

hardware 67:15

head 117:6

heading 63:17 67:8 93:10 95:20 262:6,18

headings 93:4 95:19

heads 22:13

hear 115:11

heard 77:15,18 241:15

hearing 114:3

Heitmeyer 21:5,16,17 24:20 26:12 42:1 53:12 55:14 118:6

Heitmeyer's 21:12 22:2

held 179:9

helps 194:22

hereinafter 6:2

hey 44:18 103:1

highlight 167:18

highlighted 158:22

his/her 64:8

historical 78:21 145:4 207:8

historically 78:9 121:21 134:10 141:14 186:16 240:7 268:5,12

Hogan 260:4

hold 118:14 236:2

holding 118:1

holds 103:18

holdup 222:14

holiday 240:16

home 93:19

honestly 236:20

hope 198:11

hoping 128:22 195:20 196:9

Horizon 117:8

hour 180:21 181:2 199:18

hourly/daily/weekly/accounting 169:16

hours 9:19 10:7 15:2 27:9 28:21 64:3 70:16 88:19 91:6,9 92:6,11 97:18 104:15,19 105:11 107:7, 14,15,19,21 147:11 163:24 168:5,8 169:16 177:9 180:10,14,17 182:12 188:20 195:19 196:15 215:15 217:6 225:20 226:11 229:4 245:6,21 246:4 254:15,23 255:22 256:6 258:3

housed 32:14

how's 140:16

how-to 97:16

I

I-k 149:9

idea 26:14

ideally 208:4

identification 139:11

identified 31:14 52:5 58:6,16,23 59:1 72:18 107:17 109:15,24 113:23 126:16 131:14 147:6 167:22 207:10 209:1 244:7,22

identifies 43:3 52:6 66:15 96:20

identify 66:12 127:9 139:12 215:9

identifying 59:14 232:5

IEP 72:14,18 93:5 195:1

IEPS 71:18

immediately 72:24

impact 84:5 94:23 119:13 159:24 160:5 177:15

impeccable 188:20

implementing 225:2 229:7

implication 64:7

important 6:19,23 7:4,6 217:20 230:17 239:19

imposed 128:15 182:3

imposition 162:7

impression 90:5

improvement 177:1

in-person 241:11

inability 177:16

inapplicable 156:7,8,19

include 40:5 56:5 141:5 164:3 268:1,10

included 38:21 68:7,16, 23 166:11 170:18 171:8 187:17 188:3 212:23 245:19

includes 56:16

including 18:23 62:22 78:7 148:7 234:16

inconsistent 50:6,19 52:14,23 53:5,17 54:1,7, 14 88:15

incorporating 96:3

Indiana 14:13

indicating 122:5 129:24

individual 42:13 57:3 106:23 137:17 201:13

individuals 11:3 32:11 43:21 62:19 187:18 192:12 203:8 229:23 243:12

ineligible 232:6

inform 30:20

information 26:7 42:24 43:4 44:13 45:6 46:2 71:4 77:19 81:8,11,21 87:7 89:8 106:17 108:15 121:14 130:9 136:8 148:6 149:10 165:7 181:15 192:6,9,13 194:24 199:9 200:18 204:2,20 206:3 210:3 213:11 214:22 221:11 230:16 233:18 237:2,15 242:23 247:10 252:2,5 255:15 267:3

informs 27:5

initial 31:1 42:23 56:13,18



i11

�John Wilhelm


57:6,14,17,23 58:12 59:2 62:9 156:23 157:21 158:15 175:13 199:22 206:22 208:9 215:22 221:12,18,21 222:15,22 223:3,14 227:7 231:1,19 232:22 234:4 262:16

initially 90:4 214:23 223:8

initiatives 177:2

input 86:5 213:6,14

inquire 40:12 183:7 228:15

inquired 222:21 250:19

inquiries 185:3 191:4,22 222:13,18 230:5 251:9,19

inquiry 230:12 246:1,3 250:21 251:1

inspect 173:3

inspecting 95:1

installation 67:14

instance 132:8 139:17

instituted 129:9

institution 105:3

instruct 10:19 26:9 27:1

instructed 53:18 54:22 242:3

instructing 78:2

instruction 31:3 159:18 224:24 257:2

instructions 55:6 101:21 125:14 235:10 240:20 241:22 242:19

insufficient 109:15 110:1 132:8

intending 183:2

intends 267:3

intention 38:16 181:6 187:12

interacted 27:20,23 28:6, 11,14

interaction 25:4,7

interfaced 20:6

intermediate 178:13

internet 159:17

interpretation 184:9

interrupt 7:8

interview 197:13,20,23 198:17 199:3,6 210:2,9, 17,21 246:16,22

intimate 201:7

intimated 82:24

involve 19:9

involved 76:16 77:8

involvement 18:4 19:6, 18 20:23 32:4 86:1

involving 93:12

irrespective 80:1,3,8 92:13 135:6 137:10,17 252:3

issuance 250:18

issue 55:3 92:3,8 179:20, 24 209:2 250:14

issued 222:10,23 250:10, 11 252:10

issues 58:16,24 59:14 84:20 89:12 90:8 93:12 120:4 124:16 141:18,23 163:10 198:20 206:20 209:1 210:16 214:4 224:2 228:5,17 241:15 244:10 251:21 262:7,13,18,19 263:21 264:2,8

issuing 122:12,16 221:12, 18 222:15 223:3 251:6

item 71:17 148:16 149:7

itemize 66:9

items 66:15 74:1 96:5 149:9,23 150:1,4,11,22,23 169:21 171:4,7,13,21 172:24 173:13 249:22

J

Jack 236:19

James 42:14

Jan 163:15

January 41:9,13 43:13 44:24 45:2,3,8,22 83:17 91:15 94:7 99:6 100:2,24

125:14 126:13,19 128:19 129:9 136:1,9 144:13 145:16 146:17 147:22 148:3 149:17 150:5,9,17, 24 156:24 157:19 158:9 171:6,11 207:20 245:15 247:21

Jeff 61:11

Jennifer 41:16

Jim 187:23

job 15:12,15 83:1,7,9 101:12 160:5,9 230:2

John 6:1,8 41:12 45:5 157:20 160:19

join 24:12

Jones 22:10,13,20

judge 241:15

July 109:2 194:12 236:1, 24 237:11,15,16,20 238:2 239:13,21 240:16 241:3 245:13 249:10 254:20 256:22 257:6,12 258:7,14, 15,17,20,24 259:3 260:9 262:1,10 263:4,18 264:7 266:17,21,23 269:12 270:15 271:6

June 207:6 236:2,11,17 240:19 256:10 258:6

justify 91:8 92:6,11

Juvenile 93:5

K

keeping 35:13 203:8

key 146:4

kids 139:6

kind 44:7 59:19 77:4 81:23 91:2 149:5 182:13

Kindergarten 93:6

knew 78:12 128:24 129:2, 14 135:17

knowledge 23:1 48:8 74:21 75:4,19 76:7 125:22 126:12 193:5,13 211:1 223:19 269:20

L

labeled 34:23 269:3

lack 66:2 181:11 195:18 266:11

Lambert 42:14,16,19 187:23

language 92:5,10 163:17 166:2 167:21 168:3,7 169:4 208:20 215:7 217:9 225:18,21 226:1 257:7,11, 24 258:4,11 262:5,12 263:3,17,22 264:7

large 23:13 185:20

larger 23:21

late 39:17 40:10 221:10

law 124:7

lawsuit 40:3 171:4

lawyer 241:19

leaders 179:6

lean 33:2

learning 63:18 64:3 70:16 75:17 84:4,6 93:7,11 106:16 146:4,15 159:6,10, 19 160:24 161:17 163:18, 24 169:11,17 192:18 193:16 208:13,15 215:8, 10,17 216:11 254:23 255:21 256:21

Lease 11:9,10,13,16,19 204:10,17,20,23 205:2 211:15,19 218:8,15,18,23 241:9,17,20,24 242:3,15, 18 243:2,6,8

leave 201:20

left 202:3 235:2

legal 9:10 49:18 50:8,21 51:17 52:12,19,24 219:1, 2,8 242:2,17 243:3,5 261:2,3

length 215:9

letter 8:6,16,19 13:21 44:1,4,11,17 59:18,19 61:14,18 80:24 81:2,7,8, 12 102:24 104:12,17 147:6 148:7 149:9 150:9 151:7 157:10,15,18



i12

�John Wilhelm


158:10,21 160:18 161:15 163:15 190:21 197:17 206:4,9 209:11,16 211:12, 23 212:9,12,13,16,19,23 213:4,5,14,16,22 214:6, 11,12,14,16,21 215:4,6 216:23 217:9,10,12 218:12 221:21,24 222:10, 15,23 223:3,6,14,18 225:4,11,16,22 226:1,20 227:7,9,15 228:2,6,13 230:24 231:19 232:5 248:11 249:12 250:5,9,14, 18 251:6,11,22 252:7,9, 16,17,21,22,24 253:1,5, 10,11,20,21,23 254:2,5,22 255:9 256:1,9,14 257:1,4, 5,12,13,16,23 258:5,8,13, 16,24 259:2,4,22 261:12, 22 262:3,10,17,23 263:2, 4,10,14,17,23 264:6,12 270:24

letters 8:7 9:1 96:2 146:19 219:3,8 221:13,19 229:18, 20

level 130:2 182:15

Likewise 7:12

limit 265:10

limitations 232:10,15

limited 247:2,15

list 43:4 90:2 151:15 185:8 186:8 238:16 239:6

listed 42:13 90:3 96:5 148:12

litigation 11:5

loading 270:10

local 176:22

located 20:3 24:6,17

Loew 27:9,11,16,20,23 28:7,19 29:7,17 30:3,16 33:23,24 34:4,12 36:14,22 40:10 78:1,7,16 80:24 83:17 84:14 99:15 115:19 120:10,16,17 123:19 126:5 145:16 146:14 155:13 157:12 158:1,21 162:12,15 172:12,17 173:15,20,23 174:9 178:4, 24 199:23 200:11,15 202:16 203:8,17,21 204:2, 18,22 205:4 218:16,20,21

219:22 222:19,22 223:2, 24 224:8,13 227:14,16,18, 24 229:22 231:24 232:5 233:18 234:21 236:1 239:2,5 241:17,24 242:17, 19 249:1,22 250:2,22

Loew's 94:22 95:8 124:12 147:13 157:18 160:18 161:15 163:15 178:7 233:13

log 89:8 116:4

logged 69:4 74:6,10 91:8 92:6,11 107:19 164:6 189:1 215:10

login 69:14 87:7 88:4 96:23 97:11 98:11 99:18 105:7 116:14 118:20,22 125:15 127:10 172:14 173:3,15 181:7,11 208:18 215:14,16 229:5,10 245:4, 22 246:9 247:11

login/logoff 190:14 191:1 197:6

login/logout 189:18 245:3 260:24

logins 86:15,24 98:3 180:22 181:3 215:8 245:6

logs 83:24 84:18,24

long 9:16,21 11:15 12:18 243:10

long-term 12:23

looked 35:2 61:8 66:3,18 69:14 71:20 72:7 83:15 96:19 97:20 153:21 155:12,14 157:23 165:15, 23 166:1 174:20 195:5 196:8 252:22 257:24

losing 244:18

lost 38:15

lot 51:14 87:23 102:15 216:15 232:23 234:4 239:8

lots 102:7

lower 40:24 63:15 95:15

Lucas 14:14

luncheon 155:2

M

made 20:13 31:13 59:6 67:17 78:17 86:7 94:24 96:12 101:2 111:23 112:7 120:21 127:19 131:10,19 132:10 134:5 141:1 144:22 150:4 162:4 167:7 171:21 175:23 181:13 189:8 190:10,18 191:3 192:23 194:12 195:19 206:17 214:3,6 230:12 238:8,19 240:13 246:12 251:19 259:12 263:21 264:17,21,24 266:6

magnitude 43:22 135:3

mailed 222:1,2,3

maintain 34:20 35:15,20 37:21 63:22 67:12 109:17 110:3,10,24 112:4 129:21 145:3 153:6 159:17

maintained 36:1 37:7 38:7,10 46:20 47:3,9 48:13 55:10,17 66:24 68:3 70:15 115:2 191:2 193:2

maintaining 197:24

maintains 154:3

major 83:22 84:2,11 141:9 184:19

majority 118:24 196:6

make 7:1,14 19:14 45:9 61:23 73:16 82:7 106:8,12 110:22 111:6 126:18 127:24 129:23 130:6 134:13 145:10 149:4 150:14 156:16 172:8 176:1 182:11,13,15 189:12,14,23 222:13,17 228:15 230:4 234:11 245:20 246:3 247:19 250:21 251:1,9 265:21

making 19:16 20:11 56:4 59:14 180:19,24 182:20 191:21 245:24 268:7

management 134:8 215:8,10,17 216:11

managers 84:24 113:1 143:24 201:8

managing 18:14

mandated 18:19

manner 26:10,18 27:6 29:20 30:20 31:5 53:15,18 54:14,22 60:18 78:8 101:7 161:17 164:14 174:11,18 178:8 182:2 202:10 233:19

manual 79:2,5,11,13,16, 20 80:1,4,9 84:11 85:10 86:2,6 91:7 92:5,10,19 94:13 95:10,11 97:3,10,14 98:2,5,10,13,16,17,19 99:4,5,7,12,22,23 100:19, 20 101:2,22 102:5 103:12, 23,24 104:3,4,8,11,23 122:20 123:8,13 125:9 126:12,15 136:19 137:14 146:2,10,11 152:8,12 161:1 163:17,20 164:8,9, 11,16,19 165:1,12,15 166:8,11,22,23 167:1,6, 11,14,15,23 168:7,9,13, 15,20,21 169:5,22 170:6, 18,22 171:8,14,20,22 172:3,5,10,12,15,19 173:2,14,22 174:1,5,15 175:1,4 183:3,13,17 184:2,16 185:4,19 187:9, 14 207:20 209:5 210:4,23 211:5 213:19 221:3,6 225:2,8 226:20 230:10 234:1 237:16,23 238:6,12 240:6,9 256:18

manuals 80:10 101:8 122:10,13,24 123:4,16 144:18 145:4 185:1

March 58:4 134:13 135:23 136:6 175:12 177:5 185:7, 17 187:16 188:13 189:9, 15,23 191:11,18 192:8,11, 16,24 193:19 194:18 196:16 197:7,22 198:7 200:21 202:16 203:7 209:4 211:10 216:4 221:1 223:21 253:7

Marion 6:6 88:20 199:17

mark 67:1 157:4

marked 29:24 32:19 37:17,23 39:16,23 40:19 47:18 61:3 63:9 83:14 89:19,21 101:1,8 145:9 147:19 155:12 168:20 201:11 204:5 206:15 211:16 218:2,5 219:19



i13

�John Wilhelm


223:10 227:3,19 230:21 238:23 261:10 262:23 265:17

marking 63:8

Marty 271:7

massive 141:13 186:14

match 72:18

matches 208:12

matching 188:20

material 30:15 166:3 196:19 199:14

materials 7:20 8:2,10,22 9:3 25:20 26:24 27:4 29:16,18 30:19 36:12,16 37:8,14,17,21 38:1,2,6 57:13 65:17 67:16 68:11, 14,16 149:17 158:14 187:7 190:19 203:9

matter 183:20 195:19 252:4

matters 141:19 220:15

meaning 23:13 60:10,17 102:11 119:21 158:5

means 15:4 68:10 116:10 117:15 142:15

meant 260:23

measure 75:20 76:8 80:11 98:3,11

measured 69:7 82:15

measurement 76:3 192:19 197:15

measuring 75:13 94:24

mechanically 59:5

mechanics 133:12

meet 11:10,15 144:15 175:23 241:16,20

meeting 10:6 22:12 29:5, 6 31:10,15 85:11 86:14, 22,23 100:13,15 132:16 134:22 157:21 158:15 179:9,16,17,21 180:20 181:1 220:4,6,7,11 221:11,17 241:11,24 242:14,16 243:13 266:15

meetings 22:11,15 25:9 27:17,24 28:5 29:3

102:19,20 112:1,15 113:2, 13,21 114:6 115:17,21 119:17 121:2 144:2 146:19 264:17 265:6 266:10 267:8

members 106:15 191:3 199:1 213:6

memo 209:17

memorialized 65:20 167:1 248:4

memorializing 226:19

memory 64:16 109:1 125:11

mentioned 12:6 22:5 60:3

met 11:3,18,23 175:24 247:10

methodology 60:18 120:4 175:7 231:14

middle 44:22 63:20 67:11 83:20 127:20 128:1,4 178:20 202:2 239:17 258:23 259:3

Miller 42:5,6,8 55:14

mind 23:16 135:8 180:4,8, 16

mine 57:5

minimum 139:7 163:23

minor 141:19 145:1 189:5

minutes 11:17 199:18 235:2

mirror 38:17

mirrored 55:17

missed 266:20

missing 141:12 263:24

misspoke 33:4,12

Misstates 51:21 126:24

mistaken 195:24

mobile 25:24

mode 68:14

modules 106:17 107:16, 17 190:7

moment 22:5 55:22 63:10 92:20 94:4,8 99:21 157:5 164:21

Monday 43:13 155:6

money 18:6,9,11,15,18,22 19:9,14 20:1 133:19

monies 132:10

month 266:16

months 207:24

monumental 136:4

morning 6:6

move 89:15 225:1

moved 99:5 129:9

moving 224:17

multiple 143:12,13 190:6 191:3

mumble 6:21

N

N/a 169:14

names 185:11,21 238:16

nature 220:21 267:19

necessarily 206:10 270:8

necessity 159:23 171:12

needed 15:10 44:20 45:10 58:19 62:3 66:13,16 99:6, 20 107:7 141:10,13 147:11 184:11 190:4 197:14

needing 194:24

negative 128:21 129:1,3 131:19 132:10

negatively 210:15

non-classroom 84:4 93:7,10 159:18

non-computer 84:4 93:7, 11 169:11

non-eschool 118:2,13,19

nonclassroom-based 159:5,10

noncompliance 141:18 210:16

noncompliant 141:24 142:10 210:22 211:3

nonelectronic 76:9

nonpublic 15:18,23 18:7, 15,19,21 25:24

northwest 14:12,14,17

note 170:9

noted 84:23 94:23 178:3 194:1,2 195:8

notes 12:12 179:17,18 248:18

notice 120:22 121:4 125:1,24 126:7,9 177:22 186:13,17,24 202:11 240:14

notified 160:20 249:1

number 10:22 13:21 16:11 33:5 40:22 41:1,8, 23 62:18 72:16,17 96:5 107:12 118:2,15 132:1 135:19 145:22 148:16 149:7 182:12 207:24 216:18 220:9 223:22 229:2 265:20

numbered 228:21

numbers 135:1,14 137:23 139:11 141:8 164:5

O

object 10:18 73:11 125:3 130:22 142:12

objection 49:18 50:1,8,21 51:21 53:22 57:9 69:10 112:21 114:10,20 116:7 126:24 144:21 159:9 162:18 171:23 178:17

objections 73:16

obligated 79:11 80:11,15

obligating 80:4

obligation 130:6

obligations 53:6

observations 57:22 134:14

obtain 38:23

obtaining 86:23 123:13

obvious 210:7

occasion 75:3 123:5 153:18 159:23 160:4 171:10,12 184:2 188:2



i14

�John Wilhelm


211:7 233:7

occasionally 25:8 122:20

occasioned 222:10

occasions 10:4 23:19 222:21

occupies 22:20 27:11

occur 193:17

occurred 10:6 17:17 77:21 98:24 114:5 127:6 146:22 221:17 249:2

occurring 102:15 207:5 221:18

October 34:2 37:12 39:18 40:10 63:12 89:23 91:19, 22 92:4,9,16 155:13

ODE 13:4,9 14:5 15:11 16:2 17:14 19:20 27:5 39:13,19 40:4,11 45:10 49:13,14,22 50:5 51:11 53:1,19 54:5,8,12,23 55:6, 12 73:7,23 78:6 79:9 81:19 83:11 84:16,23 87:14 89:6 92:6,11 98:24 99:9 101:19 102:2 103:9 112:5,18 114:18 119:20 120:1 122:5 123:16 125:15 128:10 132:4,18 133:4,17,23 134:8 135:24 143:20 150:4,17 159:14 160:3 163:21 164:15 170:7,19 172:22 173:14 177:22 178:16 179:5,22 180:5 181:2,6 183:2,12,16 186:4 189:22 190:18 199:12,13 200:21 202:11 203:2,9 207:1 211:2 219:12 220:4 223:19 224:1,12,24 225:6,24 226:15 227:10 228:10,11 229:3,8,23 234:22 237:8 238:3 240:20 241:19 248:24 249:18 250:3,13, 17 251:5,10,20 252:4 262:7,19,20 263:22 264:3, 9 267:2,3,10 268:2 269:1

ODE'S 55:18 102:8,16 173:2 224:4

offer 14:21 93:18 123:23 251:4 257:1

offered 24:23 68:1 91:18 92:15 162:1 223:2

offering 213:1

office 34:19 35:21 36:1 37:7,15,22 38:11 42:7,18 43:12 55:10,15,19 94:7 102:8,16 146:6 177:1 186:2 203:6 232:20 233:4, 5,14,19 271:8

offices 24:9 32:14 34:21 35:16 46:20 47:4,10 90:14 102:2 233:5 241:21 243:16

official 22:21 32:5 44:6,17 176:6

Ohio 6:12 14:12 16:23 17:1,10 23:13 29:19 32:17 47:23 60:21,23 61:19,24 94:6 104:22 105:6 151:23 152:3,16,19 153:5,10,17 154:2 160:14 269:22 270:1,7

on-the-job 31:1

one's 24:23 56:24 206:15 226:4

onetime 117:19

online 105:14 113:6 126:22 146:3 151:10 164:6 264:19 265:12

open 179:20,24

operational 17:2 242:19

opinion 190:5

opportunities 63:18 84:5 159:6,11,19 160:24 161:17 163:24 169:11,12, 17 192:18 193:16 254:24 256:21

opportunity 64:3 70:16 99:1,9 126:1 145:12 163:18 165:10 203:17 208:13 255:22

opposed 97:21 119:8 163:11 182:10 206:3 233:5

oral 200:1,4 231:2

orally 147:3 203:20 210:21 211:2

order 18:16 25:19 62:21 72:6 249:14

ordinary 109:17 110:2,23

129:22 138:4 209:8 230:2 240:23

original 13:18 46:3 62:20 71:15 190:21 225:21

originally 174:24

Ottawa 32:17 34:19,21 35:16,20 36:1 37:7,15,22 38:11 46:20 47:3,10 48:14 55:11

outlined 95:9 158:14

outlining 6:16 8:4 44:12

outstanding 163:9

overpayment 130:14 141:7

oversight 64:5 70:18

owed 256:11

ownership 101:14

P

p.m. 41:13 45:22 155:3,7 271:21

pages 97:13 98:4,12,15 166:2,10

paid 130:17 132:11,21 139:23

paper 38:7,14,17 55:17 63:22

papers 208:16

paperwork 19:13 20:12 72:8

paragraph 43:11 46:6 62:17 63:20 69:17 72:22 91:5 95:24 157:17 158:5 160:18 208:7 215:5 216:24 220:3 229:1 258:1 263:1 264:1

paragraphs 228:21

parent 195:4

parenthetical 208:21

part 8:21 10:10 29:5 38:21 39:13 57:14 59:2 67:2,18 68:4,17,24 69:5,15 70:3, 13 72:6 74:19 75:21 78:15,23 84:16 87:7,14,16 88:6 96:14 97:12 98:23 99:17 101:12 105:14

108:20 110:20 112:5,14, 24 113:4,17,20 114:19 118:8 119:10 120:2 126:23 127:11 128:9 131:4 134:1,4 136:5 138:13,16 141:2,17 142:9 144:4 145:20 150:12,19 155:17 160:3 162:11 166:3,11 168:1 180:5 189:8 193:24 194:17 196:17 197:7,19 199:2 209:3 212:23 221:1 223:21 230:9 232:7 252:23 256:22 259:11 262:23 264:15 267:4 268:13

part-time 6:11 12:18,19 14:22 42:6

partic 101:8

participant 144:1 220:7

participants 189:22

participate 16:8 152:11 192:19

participated 9:13 86:13, 21 121:3 188:6 243:12 247:7

participating 237:6

participation 217:6 225:20 226:11 246:24 258:3

pass/fail 130:24

passed 130:20 162:22 208:1 265:1

past 94:1 96:21 132:23 140:5,8 153:17 186:9,24

pasted 215:3

pause 93:15 94:10

pay 87:23

paying 51:14

peer 99:10 115:16 142:6, 7,16

peers 113:23 115:7 137:9

people 22:17 23:15 24:11, 20 41:8,24 213:3 252:1

per-pupil 18:9

perform 83:1



i15

�John Wilhelm


performance 144:3

period 15:13 174:6 246:9

periods 232:24

permitted 162:5 173:14

person 10:7 11:4,20,23 28:9 41:22 42:4,7 137:18 173:11 195:11

personally 76:15 137:11

personnel 68:4

perspective 51:11 66:15 82:9 107:10 139:21 158:4 159:2 170:6 172:13,24 226:9

pertains 65:22

phase 231:3 233:20 236:8 248:8

phone 10:5 28:13,17 44:15 100:17 161:7 163:11 175:22 231:6,7

phrase 125:3 163:2

physical 24:16 34:20

physically 24:5 32:14 163:12

picking 81:15

Pierson 236:19

pinpoint 267:21

place 44:8 48:9 72:8,14 80:2,9 102:21,22 103:2,3 111:11 152:8 158:23,24 184:3 196:6 233:1 244:6, 21 247:21 255:20

placement 249:18

Plaintiff's 30:1 33:8,15,16 37:18,24 38:22 39:23 40:20,21 47:7,18 52:6 55:22 56:2 61:9 63:3,9,11 66:8 67:5 83:14 89:5 94:5 147:20,21 155:12 157:4 164:20 201:12 204:6 211:16 212:4 218:3,6,7 219:20 223:11 227:4,20 230:22 231:22 234:14 235:23 238:24 239:2 257:20 261:11 262:24 263:8

plan 224:1 236:24

planning 100:5

point 7:13 14:6 88:11 94:14 96:9 99:9 105:6 155:23 156:5 160:14 178:4 179:21 183:11 184:13 188:7 190:1 191:22 206:6,11 217:15, 20 218:21 219:10 226:7 228:10 229:17 233:23 236:12 242:7 243:19 260:24 265:21

pointed 147:16 172:18

pointing 51:22 232:19

points 92:15 228:12

policy 88:10,13,16

Polly 117:8

population 45:14 110:16 138:7 139:13 152:4

portion 59:7 123:3 208:2, 3 230:18 247:1,15 255:9

portions 214:11

posed 260:20

position 12:19 13:5 14:23 21:12 22:20 27:11 53:3,15 91:1 103:18 168:21 182:20 201:21 224:4

positively 210:10,14

possession 113:4,15 115:2

possibility 251:16

post 85:20 86:12

posted 101:2 123:16 265:24 266:5

pot 18:18

potentially 123:20

Powerpoint 29:10,12,16 30:2 83:16,21 84:14 94:22 95:9 96:12,19 97:15,21 147:13 174:21,22 175:3

practice 23:14 61:23 88:2,3 186:16

pre-fte 179:8,21

precaution 234:11

precise 225:14

preliminary 108:20

134:14,21 194:20 207:13 252:21 253:1 254:1

preparation 10:10,23 11:6 214:7 248:15

prepare 12:8,12,14 262:2

prepared 11:11 200:10,15 205:17 209:17 222:6 248:7 250:6 251:5 254:2 256:9 257:6 258:5,13 259:2,20 263:18 269:12 270:23

preparing 7:21 9:3,7 99:22 200:3 230:17 246:21

prerequisite 229:11

present 12:2 21:3 96:21 119:13 169:21 179:11,13, 15 191:18 207:2,3 245:13 261:4 271:7,10

presentation 29:12,16 30:3 83:16 84:14 94:23 95:9 96:12,20 97:21 147:13 174:22

presented 83:16

presently 35:22 42:17

pretty 170:17 186:22 210:7 214:18 259:5 270:4

previous 126:15 145:6

previously 30:1 32:18 35:24 83:14 122:4 155:11

primarily 84:5

principal 176:21 197:1

principally 14:10

printout 45:12

prior 10:4 12:22 13:2 31:21 40:2 75:1,9,19 76:8 79:8,18 80:3,12 82:23 85:3 87:4,9,12 88:6 100:6 102:14 111:18 126:19,21 127:9 130:20 131:5 139:16 140:19 141:2 150:9,15,17 153:18 169:22 170:23 171:3,6,11 176:13,24 177:4 178:5 185:6 213:22 216:1 219:6 232:20 233:11 238:1 239:7 254:1 257:16 270:6

privilege 242:13

privy 179:7

problem 240:17

problems 234:10

procedure 96:2

procedures 187:8,13

proceed 6:17 137:20 224:17 235:10 251:5

proceeded 133:1

proceeding 233:11

proceedings 93:15 94:10

process 7:17 60:7,10 75:22 78:20 96:15 97:12 114:19 121:22 142:10 149:12 150:20 160:22 176:1 177:22 187:12 189:9 191:23 193:24 212:14 220:23 232:7 265:12 267:5 268:7

processes 44:2

processing 199:7

produce 76:14 210:11 237:14,21

produced 144:11 188:18 230:15 237:10 245:19 248:1 260:1 268:19

product 10:20

proficiency 65:3

program 19:6,8,16 111:2, 11,14 149:1

programs 19:8 257:8

prompted 34:3 252:4

prompting 252:3

promulgated 101:9 122:5 126:13 142:1,11,13 144:12,20

promulgating 178:15

proof 208:19 212:19

proofs 123:7 245:11

properly 83:7 163:22

proposing 52:23

protocol 43:5

provide 87:7,15 107:10 121:16,20 125:24 126:22 127:10 131:17 132:19



i16

�John Wilhelm


133:3 139:11,15 161:16 177:11,17 185:21 202:15 218:22 229:9 238:16 240:13 243:21 250:23

provided 25:21 26:17,24 27:5 28:19 29:1,7,9,18 30:3,16,20 31:2,4,18 47:12 50:14 54:8,20 55:6, 9 61:21 74:16 83:10 101:21 107:14 108:3 119:11 121:4 125:1,14 126:7 127:18 131:5 135:23 140:23 146:13 149:17 174:10,16 175:5 185:2,8 196:21 197:7,14 200:1 209:3 210:3 211:9 212:6 221:11 223:20 224:19 225:6 233:18 240:8 259:17 267:4

providing 202:11 223:13 230:9

provision 98:1 123:3 170:5

provisions 73:3 97:2,10 98:9

Provost 77:1,3,4,9,13,15, 19,21 87:18,19,20

public 15:17 18:2,8,13,17, 24 19:3 32:7

pull 154:15 184:12 185:9, 22 198:8 239:20 257:16

pulled 111:5 154:19

purpose 63:21 245:24

purposes 57:20 64:12 198:8,17 227:1 229:5 230:15,17

pursuant 226:24

pushback 119:18,21

put 19:24 38:14 81:11 190:8 194:23 206:2,8 209:14 214:20,21 215:3,4 247:21 248:19 254:9,21 262:12,17

Putnum 32:16

putting 102:24 219:11

Q

qualified 196:1

Quality 146:6

quantities 186:14

quarter 102:10 172:24 173:12

question 6:20 7:5,8 8:13 28:1,2 30:10 35:19 37:20 49:20 50:24 52:3,4 53:23 57:12 70:21 71:15 73:18, 20 96:18 97:23 99:8 102:14 113:11 120:3 122:23 140:13 142:19 155:18 166:17 170:17,20 172:1 173:5 182:5 189:20 194:10 207:9 216:17 221:15 224:10 225:15 229:16 230:3 235:16 243:1 250:15 252:2 260:17 261:12,18

question's 126:11 147:20

questions 6:18 7:17 15:19,24 19:23 49:4 58:19 87:22 203:23 220:10,14 230:8 237:9 260:20

quick 200:23

quickly 103:4 202:20 238:17

R

raise 120:3

raised 228:5,13,17

ran 141:8,12 186:1,2

random 186:4

randomly 185:11

rationale 187:5

Rausch 25:4,7 33:22 36:14,21 100:11 101:19 102:1 120:12 164:18 234:21

reach 57:16

reached 100:7 134:6 184:14,15 233:13 255:2 256:8

reacted 49:7 124:6

reaction 47:14 124:4

read 43:7 71:22 84:10 91:9 93:13 168:10 261:16

reading 48:15 54:21 55:1, 4 71:18 91:10 208:15

reads 163:17 215:14

ready 111:3 176:3 251:3

real 197:24

Realistically 128:24

reason 7:9 24:14,18 38:15 47:1 49:21 50:4,16 55:2 115:1 121:19 122:1 135:10,12 183:1 186:23

reasoning 121:24

rec 105:12

recall 17:17 19:19 20:5,11 27:8 36:13,20 39:11 40:1, 14 46:22,23 47:16 48:1,2, 4,15 49:3,7 51:14 62:2 64:14,15,17 65:1,7 69:3, 24 70:20 78:10,14 85:7 89:17 90:7,11,16 91:17,21 92:1,3,8,14 99:13,14 103:15,21 114:3 115:20, 22 120:15,24 121:11 141:12 153:15 155:19,23 156:5,21 157:16 161:24 162:4,9,11 164:13 165:9 167:11 171:9,13 172:20 173:9,17 175:19 177:3,19 179:20 180:1,3,19,24 197:11 201:10 202:9,17 203:20,24 204:1,21 205:3 214:1 220:14 222:20 223:1 231:6 235:9,21 237:6 238:15 243:9 251:14 260:10,19 266:22

recalls 30:8

receipt 227:9

receive 18:8 69:19 70:7 71:2 72:9 94:16 143:19 211:14 229:20 230:3 250:1

received 20:24 25:19 26:8 27:8 28:21,24 40:16 46:21 47:2,21 52:8 74:9 80:17,23 94:13 130:13 131:11 145:16 148:2 159:1 219:14,21 242:2,8, 14 256:4

receiving 26:6 91:21 131:7 186:5 234:20 235:9

recent 9:21 163:20 164:7 270:5,11

recently 36:4 270:4

recess 89:1 155:2 201:3 235:6 268:21

recitation 7:2 206:12

reciting 211:12

recognize 33:15,17 145:14 147:21 212:4 231:23 232:3 234:15

recollecting 95:3

recollection 16:17 34:9 40:3 46:12 54:3,11 66:2 79:9 89:14 105:12 111:1 123:2 124:10 157:19 161:4,10,20 164:24 165:4 171:3 218:17 267:24

recollections 12:15

recommendation 264:13

recommendations 59:15 192:23 206:20 209:1 217:1 257:2 263:2, 5,7,14

recommended 108:14

recommending 207:5 229:6 257:7

record 21:15 65:2,7,17 71:6 74:5 75:13 88:24 89:2 122:6 132:3 154:23 155:9 201:2,4 208:12 223:20 235:5,7 268:20,22

recordkeeping 18:22

records 35:16,24 36:20 37:6 65:5 67:12 68:3 74:21,22 75:5,13 77:9 78:22 79:6,12,17,21,23 80:5 83:5,6 87:15,16 88:4, 5 89:9 93:5 95:1,2 96:14, 23,24 97:11 99:18 105:8, 14 106:9,11,21 108:12 109:9,18 110:3,6,10,13, 15,24 112:4 113:5,18,24 114:8 115:2 116:5,14,15 117:20 118:20,22 119:2 120:1 125:15 126:23 127:11 129:21 151:2,4 153:6,14,22,24 164:2 170:8,19 172:14 173:3,15 177:17,23 179:22 180:4 181:7,12 184:12 185:9,23 189:16,17,24 190:15 191:5,9 193:11 194:22,23 195:1,6 196:5,6,11,13



i17

�John Wilhelm


197:6 198:1 210:10 216:3, 5,9 220:16 239:9 240:12 244:12 245:18,19 246:11 247:8,12,20 255:20

rectified 66:16

redactions 58:8

redistricting 13:16

reduced 133:10

reduction 184:19

refer 62:22 123:11 167:10

reference 20:13 79:21 164:7,9 234:3 263:21

referenced 18:1 43:10 79:13 146:11 148:16 162:14 170:14,24 189:2

references 220:4 259:15

referencing 170:23 265:4

referred 125:18 132:4 159:21 178:11 249:4

referring 26:3 37:12 46:4 71:24 76:4,11,18 85:21 93:16 95:11 125:5 147:9, 10,14,15 154:10 159:7 166:18,19 205:7 229:17 262:15,21 263:6

reflected 155:16 172:5

reflecting 107:11 151:4 258:5 263:18

reflects 204:9

refresh 46:11 165:4

refreshes 157:18 164:23

regard 7:15 103:22 237:2

region 13:22,23 14:2,8,10 21:21,23,24 23:3,6,22 24:4,6,16,17,24 42:18 118:7,8 144:4,10 151:18 230:8

regions 23:20 142:23 143:2,3,12

regular 29:6 111:11 113:4 117:19

regurgitated 59:18 81:8

relate 84:10 93:11 106:12 161:9

related 10:4 34:6 67:15

77:9 174:24 198:19 231:10

relating 11:4 35:16,21 36:1 37:2,8,15,22 38:1,2, 11 48:14 160:14 188:23 220:15 267:10

relation 36:6 79:23 235:12

relay 178:12

relayed 162:12

release 219:15 222:4,6 251:11,21 252:7

released 250:20

relied 93:24 248:18

relying 51:19,23

remained 15:12

remaining 107:9 108:8

remedied 198:21

remember 46:15 65:14 76:21 166:6 179:19 197:9

remind 258:18

reminded 206:8

removed 36:4

reopen 117:16

repay 130:15 133:9,19

repayment 129:11 130:6

repeat 116:11 182:4

replacement 21:9

reply 162:23

report 8:3 12:14 22:7,8,10 32:11 56:6,18 57:1,8,20 58:4,10,18,23 59:6,10,20 61:15 62:23 63:5 65:24 66:5,6,14 81:4,12,13 109:3,4,6 129:23 139:24 140:1,11,17,22 154:14,18 160:22 161:13 163:8,9 182:9 186:2,3 199:11 200:9,14 202:15 203:16, 22 204:3 205:4,8,10,14, 16,18 206:2,3,10,11,15,17 207:11 209:8,15 211:10, 20,24 214:19,20,23 215:3 247:8 248:4,6,9,10,14,22 249:11 259:13,20 269:11 270:23

reported 107:24 108:1 137:24 163:22 208:13 215:17 262:7,18,20 263:22 264:3,9

reporter 6:24

reporting 203:20

reports 200:1,4 219:11

represent 40:21

representatives 108:11 153:12 260:11

represents 149:10

reprimand 80:18

request 36:21 84:24 162:5 164:2 185:17 189:12,14,24 190:18 238:19 239:12,16 240:4, 15 243:22

requested 87:6,14 122:19 126:22 133:4 161:18 218:14 238:15 240:12 245:15

requesting 54:13 83:23 84:17 123:3

requests 65:11

required 65:9 79:5 132:22 133:18 149:11 163:23 230:14 237:14,20

requirement 71:9 98:2 99:17 116:14 127:17 159:16

requirements 84:3 98:10 107:22 116:4,8,19 122:18 128:15 133:16 140:13 147:17 158:23 159:20 163:18 166:24 167:16 168:4 175:14 179:6 202:12 210:12 213:18 237:22 244:5,12,21

requires 16:3 226:20

requiring 229:3,9

requisite 133:3

res 47:14

rescheduling 236:6

research 169:23 208:16

residence 123:7 245:11

resolved 58:19 141:20

resources 68:1 208:15

respect 8:9 9:2 11:5,24 17:21 19:1 40:13,15 46:12 47:6,24 48:6 58:20,22 70:10,23 79:17 107:20 108:8 109:14,23 118:18 119:4 124:16 139:9 144:18 151:10 153:10 188:17 193:8 197:15 214:3 219:8 244:11 246:10 247:20,23 267:14

respective 8:9

respond 227:18 228:4,17 230:5 234:22

responded 92:13 228:12

responding 92:1,14

response 46:2 91:18 102:13 123:22 148:1 161:24 178:7 211:14 229:15,19,23 234:18 243:2 250:23,24

responses 6:24

responsibilities 18:1 21:22 25:3 32:5 101:13 160:3

responsibility 13:11 19:12 22:24 101:14

responsible 13:7 15:21 18:14 57:4 122:12,15 128:5

rest 271:13

result 58:14 131:20 137:10,16 164:1

results 8:4 57:6,11,22 58:3 61:22 65:3 134:21 138:5 139:20 143:20 181:20,23 200:21 231:1 253:7 263:19 264:18,22 265:7 266:4,6

retain 68:13

retained 37:15

retired 13:1 21:6

retirement 22:3

review 7:20,23,24 8:1,5, 12 10:17 11:13 12:3 16:7 17:24 18:12,20 19:2 20:7, 22 23:9 24:8,12,15 26:19 27:1 31:6,13 35:1,15,23



i18

�John Wilhelm


37:8,16 38:1,3 42:9,20,24 43:6,21 44:3,8 46:13 49:1, 11,12,14,22 50:4,10,13,16 51:8,13 52:16 53:10,14, 16,19 54:16,23 55:7,23,24 56:4,6,11,13,14,17,18,20, 24 57:7,13,14,17,20,23 58:12,14,23 59:2,8,20,24 60:8,15,21 61:7,15,16 62:5,6,11,13,19,23,24 63:5,6 64:18 65:15 66:11, 14 67:3,18 68:5,18 69:1,5, 15 70:4,13 72:7 73:7,23 74:8,19,21 75:22 78:23 79:6,12 81:3 84:11 87:8, 14,16 90:6,8,12,13,18 91:13 94:6,8 95:21 96:2,3, 15 97:12,14 98:1,9,16 99:18 100:6,18,20 101:1, 8,22 103:2,12 104:18 105:3,15,17,23 106:6 108:21,23 109:19 110:21 111:19 112:6,17,19 114:16,19 116:13 117:11, 18,19 118:7 119:10 123:16 124:16 126:23 127:11 128:20,21 129:14 131:5,21 134:13,21 135:18,23 136:6 137:3,9, 11,17,18 138:1,13,16,17 139:3,16,19 140:10,15 141:2 142:10 143:21 144:18 145:12 146:2,10 148:7,17,21 149:2,12 150:5,13,20 152:20 153:2 154:18 155:17 156:7,20 157:1,21 158:15,23 159:1, 24 160:4,13,24 161:13 163:6,11,13,17,20 164:8, 9,11 165:2 166:4,12,14, 18,19,23 167:6,8 168:8,22 170:2,7,19 171:15 172:8 173:2,14,19 175:11 176:10,14 177:5,16 178:5 179:9 180:5,21 181:2,7, 19,23 184:4 185:2,7,17,24 187:16 188:3,12,15 189:8, 9,15,18,23 190:2,8,9,13 191:3,12,19 192:11,17,24 193:20,24 194:5,8,14,18, 19 195:20,23 196:12,17 197:2,5,8,12 198:7,9,14 199:2 200:21 201:6 202:16 203:6,7 205:18,21 206:12,23 207:1,5,11,13 208:2,8 209:2,4,5 211:9, 10,20 213:3,6,10,13,18 215:22 216:4 218:12

219:2,3,8,11 220:1 221:1, 9,12,18,21 222:15,23 223:3,6,14,21 224:22 225:1,7 227:1,7,23 229:6 230:18 231:1,3,15,19 232:21,22,23 233:12,14, 21 234:1,5,9,13 235:11,18 236:8 237:11,17,20 238:2, 6,12 240:21,22 241:1,2, 13,23 243:12 244:4,20 245:13 246:13,18 247:2,6, 14,15,20 248:11,17 249:10,12,23 250:5 251:6, 11 252:7,9,23 253:8,11 254:5,17,20 255:15 256:10,23 257:12 258:7, 16,18 259:22 260:9 261:14,15 262:2,17 263:19 264:22 265:12 266:4,7,17 268:4 269:5,13 270:6,13,18,22,24 271:4,7

review-related 205:2

reviewed 8:21 9:3 10:10, 11 48:20,23 51:1 54:19 60:4 64:11 65:6,18 66:10 67:2 68:4,17,24 75:5 85:13 91:23 96:9,14 97:12 118:20 121:22 131:4 138:2,19 142:9 146:23 147:18 149:11 150:2,12, 19 151:21 160:8 166:3 175:15 180:5 193:24 206:22 215:16 219:8 223:5 239:7 256:22

reviewer 53:6 70:12 96:1 98:3,11 148:17 184:9 207:3 208:9 234:8

reviewers 43:14 59:1 66:23 88:3 191:17 199:10 207:1 215:21

reviewing 83:5 84:3 86:15 96:1 110:17 119:24 120:18 137:20 146:5 159:14 179:23 196:3 203:10,13

reviews 8:10 15:21,23 16:11,15 17:10,14,22 19:18 20:16 23:21 24:2 25:1,12,19,24 26:3,11,13 27:7 29:21 30:21 31:6 35:3 37:2,3 48:7 61:22 62:7,9 75:1,6,19 77:22 78:2,8,18 80:19 82:2,19 83:5 84:16 87:4 88:6 91:3 94:1 100:4,21 103:6

113:3,17 114:23 117:1 118:10,12 124:13,21 130:19 132:15 139:2,10 141:15,23 143:17 144:4, 10 152:24 153:16 168:2 174:2,11,19 175:8 176:13 178:9 183:4 184:24 188:6 232:19 233:1,9 237:3 265:7,14,22 266:12 267:4, 11 269:7

revised 91:15

revisions 86:5 145:2 206:16 214:2

Rick 157:12 161:6 175:21, 22,24 177:4 178:11 179:18 186:1 236:23 238:20,21 239:19 250:7

Rick's 162:19 186:2

right-hand 40:24 63:15 95:15

Rob 55:14

Robert 42:5,6

role 22:1,18

rolled 119:20

Ron 21:5 24:20 26:12 41:24 53:12 55:14 118:6 236:19

Ron's 21:8

room 196:14 260:17

Ross 201:13,15

roughly 105:21 118:2

rule 74:17 119:12 122:23 127:20 131:24 145:5

rules 18:9 73:17 126:14 128:1 187:5 193:15

run 160:22 234:10

running 161:13 207:14

S

sample 70:1 135:20 137:21 138:4,5 139:12,23 186:5

sampling 139:3

Sandra 103:17 106:18 110:11

satisfaction 73:2,9 131:6, 18 210:12

satisfactory 128:14

satisfied 74:2 133:17 189:10

satisfy 107:22 136:12 185:3 210:3 237:21

schedule 15:9 59:7 227:22 231:8 232:24 235:17,20 266:21

scheduled 103:6 105:3 151:20 231:9

scheduling 100:4 146:19 231:10 236:7

school 12:23 13:2 16:3 18:7,8,13,15,17,21 19:10, 23 25:16 27:14 32:2,6 35:9,11,14 44:2 56:12 57:21 59:24 62:14 63:22 65:10,16 67:11 68:1 72:9 76:13,18 77:4 85:17,19 91:13,14 93:18 94:6,7 100:21 101:17 105:15 111:10,15,19 114:8,16 115:9 117:2,15,16 118:4 119:1 122:19 127:21 128:2 129:18,20 130:1,5, 12 131:7,11,16 132:1,11 133:19 137:6,16 138:20, 24 146:6 149:5 151:12,17, 20 152:9,13,19,24 153:7 154:14 163:12 166:13,19 169:13 176:22 177:1 179:6 185:22 186:13 198:2 206:23 208:9 214:15 219:9 229:12 230:16 233:6 234:7 264:19,23 265:13

school's 67:23 119:14 130:4 131:20 153:12

schools 15:18,19,22,23 16:5,8,12,16 18:3,19,24 19:3 23:21 25:12,20 31:23 32:7,8 48:7 61:23 72:3 75:23 76:4,9 78:13 81:19, 22 82:1,4,5,10,14,20 84:6, 20 85:1 86:15,24 90:24 93:12,17 100:21 101:3,10, 13 102:7,16 114:15,17 116:6,20,24 117:23 118:3, 13,19,23 119:5,11,23 120:18 122:17 123:12,21 130:19 131:3,9 132:6



i19

�John Wilhelm


141:15,24 144:14 146:5,7, 15 151:11,13 163:10 174:5 193:8 202:11 230:4, 7 233:4 265:14 269:16

Science 117:9

scrutiny 187:1

secondhand 77:16,17,18

section 67:6 70:10 71:12 72:24 73:3,9 74:14 93:16, 21,24 94:11 122:19 123:6, 9 168:24 264:13

sections 147:15

seeking 107:22 112:5,18 115:3 128:10 135:24 136:9

segregated 34:24

selected 58:12 72:15 106:20 154:18

semantics 200:8

send 34:3,6 36:5 44:17 62:6 81:2,12 122:22,23 199:22 204:13,14,16,23 206:9 214:20 239:6 249:7 250:20

sending 46:1 252:16

senior 182:20

sense 16:10,17 29:9 112:12 120:21 127:20,24 152:22 178:10 202:19,21 214:11 240:13 261:24

sentence 158:2,7,8 217:4 258:1

sentences 84:9

separate 8:24 66:20 101:24 165:9 251:18 266:3

separately 38:9 242:16

September 85:20,21 86:12,21 89:12 127:6

sequence 12:10

series 6:18 22:16

served 214:24

service 17:24 32:16

services 15:22 18:5,6 19:2 160:11

servicing 230:4

serving 13:2,19 14:24

SESSION 155:6

set 26:9 29:19 34:20 47:17 49:23 57:7 61:13 69:16 70:6,24 74:1,14 79:1,5,10 80:10 97:4,13 98:4,12 137:13 150:10,22,23 161:14 166:10 171:7 174:11,17 175:6 187:8,13 204:2 210:23 211:4 225:7 226:19 228:2 237:15,22 238:4,5,12 239:7 240:8 256:19 268:10

sets 51:2 58:18 98:2,10

setting 29:15 107:8 175:14

SF-6 19:7

shape 195:6

share 99:10 120:12 140:8, 9 177:14,20 178:24 188:16 194:19 227:10,12 242:3,9

shared 100:12 107:18,20 112:15 113:1 114:14 115:16,18,21 120:9,16 134:22 135:7 175:16 178:4 192:11 193:7 198:19 200:10,15 204:1 209:9 251:20 252:5

sheets 261:1

short 247:5 251:18

shortly 202:3 241:8

show 29:24 40:19 61:3 63:8 66:4 75:16 83:13 89:18,21 121:13 145:9 147:11,19 155:11 157:24 180:13 194:4 201:11 204:5 216:16 218:2,5 219:19 223:10 227:3 230:21 234:14 238:22,23 261:10

showed 51:24 135:3 203:22 253:4

showing 180:10 253:7 260:23

shown 10:14,16,23 26:13

shows 33:22 66:24

shy 6:21

sic 8:12 148:2 179:13 183:3

SIDS 206:24

signature 64:8 271:18

signed 64:21

significance 64:7

significant 129:10

similar 112:2 117:18 152:5 261:21,24 270:20

simple 231:10

simply 52:13 91:23 167:23 178:8 184:23 209:18 229:6

single 113:22 127:9

sir 10:12 13:14 23:7 33:15, 18 41:11 46:11 51:9 52:5 56:2 67:5 69:22 75:8,24 87:10 89:4 90:20 91:17 92:18 101:5 109:7 111:21 112:9,11 114:22 126:17 144:6,16,24 149:21 154:11 155:11 156:9,14 158:11,19 160:10 162:20 164:7 170:16 173:8 183:23 191:14 198:4 200:5 201:6 204:6 210:6, 18 218:2,6 219:20 223:11 224:9 227:4 231:5 234:15 235:9 246:5,14 255:6 256:2 259:8 261:10 262:15 268:24

sit 50:3 54:4,10 165:12 173:10

site 123:13

sitting 6:24

situation 112:2 130:11 178:21

size 23:12 152:2

slide 83:21

slight 152:6

slightly 113:10

small 141:8 188:22 189:3 195:13

smaller 152:6

SOES 163:8,9

software 74:9

sole 233:24

solicit 243:5

sort 6:16 147:12 256:13

sought 114:18 182:23

sounds 39:3 198:18

source 27:5 47:4,11 62:21 102:3 265:11

sources 108:12

space 208:4

spaces 220:20

speak 9:6,9,16 162:5 165:10 203:17 233:8

speaker 197:1

speaking 40:6 218:18

speaks 57:10

special 16:4 19:9 29:5 65:10 71:9 72:4 82:5 196:7 245:10 247:12

specific 34:8 56:17 58:8 67:2 69:24 96:4 99:3,11 118:2 123:7 151:4 155:19, 24 173:17 179:22 189:12, 24 190:18 203:23 237:9 240:20 260:17,19

specifically 15:20 66:2, 18 70:13 72:13 78:14 97:3 101:20 113:2,17 115:22 120:15 140:9 166:1 169:10 177:19 197:9 220:17 229:9,10 239:14

specifics 62:24

Speculate 135:14

Speculation 134:1,3

spelled 136:18,20

spend 18:11

spent 9:20 106:22 107:11

spoke 9:22

spoken 10:1,3 231:18

sponsor 24:17 117:15 148:16,18

sponsors 146:7

spreadsheet 90:23 91:4



i20

�John Wilhelm


Springfield 117:9

square 14:15

SSID 164:4

SSIDS 206:22

staff 106:15 215:17

stages 56:13

stamp 63:14 95:14 154:11

stamped 40:24 44:23 56:22 67:7

standard 43:24 44:7 60:17 62:5,10 81:1,17 122:23 131:2 132:16 205:16 238:10

standards 60:14,23 79:1, 5,10 80:10 82:2,3,21 101:16 119:20 121:6 122:18 123:22 124:24 125:2,4,7,19,23 126:2,14, 16 128:13 137:2,13 142:1, 11,12 144:12,15 152:18 153:1,8 162:7 178:14,17 187:8,13 189:6,10 210:22 211:4 213:18 225:6 237:22 238:5 244:5,12,21 247:16,21,24 256:19 268:3,11

standpoint 49:16 53:5 60:5 152:3 165:5 196:19 216:12,20 228:1 237:13 258:13

start 20:7 60:11 72:24 74:12 92:24 101:17 102:17 110:7 146:18 154:16,21 207:17,18,19 219:11

started 12:20 13:4,8,19 21:6 25:10 69:13 100:4 110:12 114:23 190:9,13 199:10 207:15

starting 14:13 114:1 116:12 205:9 207:20 214:15 245:15 255:17

starts 157:11

state 14:17 19:15 61:19, 24

stated 181:6 262:19

statement 159:2 180:19, 24 195:20 262:22

statements 229:2 246:22

status 222:22

statute 159:6,11

statutes 159:24 160:4,5, 7,11,14

statutory 159:16,20

stemmed 102:24

step 199:6

stop 7:9,10 90:6

Stoy 232:20 233:2,3,8

strictly 18:20

strike 89:20 116:2 126:17 152:17 171:5 173:21 180:2 181:16 226:1,5 258:14

stuck 200:7

student 19:11 20:1,2 46:2 58:11,15,16 63:23 65:3 67:23 68:3,12,17,24 69:19,20 70:7 71:3 72:4, 15 73:1,8,24 74:9,13,16 75:21 76:9 80:11 83:6 87:15 88:5 89:8 96:13,23 97:11 98:3,11 106:13,17, 19,22 107:11 108:3 110:4, 16,24 111:12 113:6,18 119:8,11,12 136:23 138:6, 17,19 139:11 151:2,4 152:4 153:21 164:4,6 168:23 169:11,17 170:8 180:13,21 181:3 182:12 185:11 190:10,14 191:2 193:10 197:16,24 198:9, 20 201:9 206:21 208:12, 14 215:9,11,18 217:6 225:20 226:11 238:16 243:19 244:1 246:8 257:9 258:3

student's 66:19 68:21 69:2,7 70:5 72:20 75:14 113:5 245:22

students 16:5 19:9,23 58:9,20,23 65:10,24 71:10,19 72:16,17 74:23 80:12 88:6 93:18 105:20 106:5 107:5,6,9,18 108:4, 9,11,19 109:14,24 118:24 136:15 137:22 138:20 139:1,3,23 140:15 154:16, 19 164:3 168:23 185:8,14, 18,21 186:3 188:23

192:18 195:13 215:16 223:22 247:10 254:16,19 255:4,8,22 256:11,21

students' 239:6

study 93:19

subfile 269:15,17

subfiles 269:8

subject 42:23 82:1 86:14, 23 105:13 113:3 114:15 143:17 144:10 152:23 183:20 185:1 211:20 218:18 224:14 252:4 254:17,20 271:12

subjected 143:21

subjects 97:3 179:2

submit 59:5

submitted 16:6 203:16 239:12 240:15 248:21,23

submitting 54:11

subparagraph 172:4

subsequent 206:16 210:20

subsequently 40:12

substantial 135:19

substantially 15:5 258:10

substantiate 208:10 215:15 223:21 224:19 256:6

substantive 198:24 228:1,5,12,17 231:13 258:12

subtracted 14:8

success 264:19 265:13 266:11

successful 67:22

successfully 144:11 160:21

sued 241:4

suffice 180:10

sufficiency 177:22 196:20

sufficient 107:10,12 108:3 121:4 131:17 132:3, 20 136:21 185:3 244:7,23

254:22

sufficiently 224:5 256:20

suggest 22:7 82:13 132:13,18 181:5,9 188:9 195:22 201:7 238:3

suggested 79:23 82:24 88:14 124:20,24 125:23 183:11 238:9

suggesting 54:13 80:19 114:21 121:12 197:13

suggestion 133:23 134:7 136:2 181:13

summarize 256:17

summarizes 66:17

summarizing 259:3

summary 12:14 65:16 143:20 150:11

superintendent 103:19 110:19 111:8 176:23

superiors 178:22

supervisor 21:4,5,8 31:2 42:1 53:7 54:5,12 55:4 77:19 80:18 108:2 129:24 134:8,23 140:10,23 169:13 182:1 226:14

supervisor's 53:20

supervisors 108:1,6 127:8 139:21

supplanting 221:5

supplied 129:15

supplies 18:16

support 131:6,18 132:9, 20 133:4 244:8,23 254:23

supported 8:16 170:7 173:2 255:10

supposed 15:2 18:10 50:12,18 51:4 62:11 124:8 129:23 167:14 172:9 179:4 209:14 221:8

sworn 6:2

system 19:24 72:19 164:6 188:24 189:1 193:17 215:8,10,18 216:11 217:5, 13,17,21,24 225:19 226:10 258:2



i21

�John Wilhelm


T

taking 53:3,15 208:16 233:1

talk 140:19 178:21 260:21

talked 28:16 87:17 134:17 175:21 177:7 195:8 213:2 214:14 265:1

talking 84:20 116:3 162:17 187:7 197:9 227:21 234:6 253:14,15

talks 185:19 207:20

task 86:7,9,10 111:5 136:4

taxing 109:1

teacher 64:23 169:13 176:20 193:20,23 194:4, 11 212:21 255:24 256:7 260:22

teachers 64:21 208:17

team 191:3 192:24 194:19 199:2 203:13 206:24 213:3,7,13

technically 21:7 22:6

techniques 193:9

Teeter 179:13 225:5 228:4

Teeters 157:13 161:6,22 162:1 175:16,22 177:4,10, 14,20 178:3 179:2 180:20 181:1 192:4 216:2 223:13 225:12 227:5 228:18 230:13,24 231:4,20 234:16 250:7,10,14,18

Teeters' 228:2,5,13,21 234:23

telling 79:9 99:19 206:1 211:18

ten 13:18 14:13 118:12,18 119:4,11 143:1,2,8 203:1, 5 248:16 249:9 258:21 271:2

tenure 14:5 26:23

term 75:15 130:23 247:1

terminated 202:6,8

terms 11:24 14:22 25:18 31:18 32:5 49:4 50:6,19 82:6,15 88:2 107:21

129:6,10 132:16 133:18 146:22 152:4 168:7 193:10 199:7 210:11 259:7 261:22

territory 16:19,22

test 65:3 125:11

tested 141:15

testified 170:18

testify 242:20

testimony 14:4 40:11 51:22 64:22 127:1,15,18 134:23 144:8 156:4 168:6, 9 170:23 190:24 238:1 246:11 267:1 271:20

testing 82:2,3

tests 73:14 208:16

text 83:22 84:9

thereabouts 252:14

thing 31:17 168:8 196:11 205:6 242:7 270:5

things 25:23 32:23 38:14 46:8 86:8 141:11 187:3,6, 7 195:5 196:8 216:14 219:24 220:21 232:4 234:12 267:19

thinking 12:10 76:24 105:22 145:1 170:22 178:10 261:7 267:15

thirteen 152:7

thought 52:22 53:6,24 66:13 98:8 115:8 127:19 240:3

thousand 152:7

time 7:13 9:18,24 11:18 13:5 14:6,23 15:13 19:7 42:2,19 43:8 46:24 50:11 62:6 64:18,19 71:23 73:17 75:14 78:6 79:18 84:22 85:4,14 86:18 88:11,20 89:6,10 92:7 93:14 94:14 96:9 99:9,16,19 104:18 105:6 106:22 107:12 108:13 111:12 112:19 114:1 115:4 118:24 120:2 122:24 126:21 128:1 135:24 136:9 146:18 150:2,5 153:12 155:21,24 156:5 160:14 161:22 162:2 164:5,23 165:5

168:22 172:3,7,17 174:6 176:2 178:7 179:21 180:6 183:11 184:3,19 185:22 186:1,19 188:7,22 189:1 191:22 192:20 195:21 196:9 198:15 201:9 202:21 204:19 207:7,10, 12 208:6,13 215:9,16,19, 21 216:12 217:13,15,16 218:21 219:10 222:1 226:7 229:5,10 232:9,13, 24 238:1 239:20 240:5,8 241:1,2,7 245:2,3,5,15 246:9,12 247:3,10 250:13, 17 251:10,15 255:17 256:5 259:14 261:4 266:14 271:16

timeline 226:10 239:7

times 62:14 103:7 116:4 175:22 184:5 189:18 215:14 236:11 247:11

timetable 226:15,18

timing 100:15 164:24 252:5,6

title 22:21 27:13 29:8 94:6 262:13

today 6:18 12:9 22:9 32:23 48:4 50:3 54:4,10 59:11 87:22 109:11 155:15 165:12,16 168:6 173:10 201:18

told 43:19 52:7 62:6,7 73:22 83:15 99:6,23 100:6,18,19 116:12 125:13 126:19 140:1 143:2 148:20 153:20 170:1 182:9 192:3,4 198:14 200:14 209:20 210:9 216:21 224:21 259:16

Toledo 117:10 132:1

tool 200:19

tools 193:9

top 95:17 117:6 216:24 234:16 235:24 239:1 263:1,14

total 43:14 107:14,15,21 108:20 118:11 142:21,23 143:16 164:5 206:21 217:5 225:20 226:11 248:19 258:3

town 236:12

track 9:18 110:3 257:9 259:5,7,10 260:6

tracked 111:11 216:12, 14,19

tracking 91:6 115:3 193:9 217:5 225:20 226:11 258:3

traditional 15:17 18:2,24 19:3 32:7

training 25:18 31:2,11,18

transmittal 225:4

transmitted 224:3 249:18

treated 81:20 82:10,15

treating 82:20

trend 78:1

trip 175:23

trips 208:17

trouble 110:12,14 161:12

Troy 42:18

true 17:6 26:22 54:8,9,17 110:15 128:7 138:16,18 156:17 159:3 169:3 239:11

Tuesday 41:13 43:15

turn 56:21 68:9 95:5,13,23 149:15

type 12:14 13:20 18:4 28:20 30:15 43:4,24 55:19 60:13 65:16 67:1 68:2,16, 23 75:13 76:2,6 77:3 80:17 82:6 106:11 110:10 112:4,17 113:15,24 115:3, 8,15 120:1 121:16,20 122:5,16 127:17 128:9 129:21 136:8 138:9,12 143:19 150:19 153:21 154:3 170:19 177:12,17, 23 190:18 191:24 192:5, 13 193:1,6,14 214:4 219:14 226:21 232:9,15 257:1 262:5 263:3

types 175:5 191:5 197:14

typically 43:20 56:12 110:10 148:17 205:17 207:12,17 208:1



i22

�John Wilhelm


typographical 213:1 214:3

U

Uh-huh 13:24 41:2,18 42:3 56:23 64:2 116:16 141:4 169:20 200:17 239:4 253:6 262:8

ultimately 22:10 211:23 223:7

unable 136:12

unavailable 182:23

unclear 181:24 182:8 229:3

underline 262:21

underneath 83:22

understand 6:19 8:8,13 14:4 20:18 24:7 28:1 30:18 37:20 40:11 43:3 53:23 57:12 58:10 73:6,23 75:15 77:6 81:24 95:8 96:18 97:8,13 116:9 127:15 138:14 151:16 156:4 167:12,13 169:24 172:1 190:24 207:9 221:14,24 238:9 239:16

understanding 77:7,10 79:1 81:18 149:4 168:1 170:13 172:16 218:24 224:16 263:6 266:4

understands 64:7 70:19

understood 50:17 87:4 88:1,2,9,12 119:23 136:14 195:9 213:17 216:1,13 241:3

undertaken 76:7 199:7

underway 232:19

unfamiliar 46:3

uni 220:22

uniformity 184:16

uniformly 82:11,14,20 137:3,14

unify 220:23

unit 26:1

upcoming 148:6

updated 31:9 146:2 203:9

updating 270:10

usual 247:9

utilize 164:16

utilized 60:8 102:5 103:13 104:24 193:9 221:1 252:16

V

vacation 236:11 266:20

Vague 114:10 116:7 162:18

variation 59:12

varied 62:9

varies 16:9

verbal 155:24

verbalize 6:23

verbally 92:14 155:20 173:24

verified 60:19 64:4 70:17 72:21 164:5

verify 30:6,13 44:8,15 76:23 91:2 160:23 161:16 163:21 249:13

verifying 148:7

versus 137:9 214:13 238:11 268:11

video 235:2

view 126:6 170:7 197:23

viewed 74:11 80:4 156:18

vintage 270:11

violate 119:11

violated 74:17

violating 51:6,12

Virtual 16:23 17:1,10 23:14 60:22,23 104:22 105:6 151:24 152:3,17,19 153:5,10,17 154:2 264:22 269:22 270:1,7

visits 60:10

volume 240:12

vote 113:8

W

waived 271:18

wanted 23:16 36:18 44:19 45:8 66:1 81:21 122:21 149:8 178:21 219:1 220:21,22 228:9

waste 176:2

water 271:17

ways 19:2 200:8 215:18

website 67:23 123:12,17

week 10:7 15:8 46:1 240:16 252:13 258:20

weekend 239:13

weekly 14:23

weeks 11:12 15:4,5,9

When's 266:14

White 103:17,18,22 104:16 105:10 106:18 110:11

Wilhelm 6:1,8,9 40:20 41:12 157:20 160:20

withdrawal 167:5 172:2, 11 173:22

withdrawn 164:12 165:1, 13 166:9,24 171:20 246:8

words 138:1

work 8:15 10:19 15:2,7 19:1 44:16 154:17 176:3

workdays 206:23 239:15

worked 24:20 32:1 42:7 176:23 241:19

working 32:7 76:13 85:10 107:16 111:2,15 123:6 146:6

works 188:1 233:3

worth 232:19

wow 51:6

wrap 43:15

write 220:20

write-up 199:23 202:22

writing 29:20 146:18 147:2 169:13 199:10

200:3 208:15

written 26:16,23 27:4 183:13,17

wrote 8:4 190:22

Y

year 15:3 16:9,14,16 25:12 28:22,23 30:4 31:14 35:1,4,14 36:8,9 39:14 40:4,5 59:13 60:23 62:2, 20 70:8 75:2 76:12 80:21, 22 85:9,14,17,18,19 90:22,23 98:16 100:22 101:9,17 104:24 105:15, 18 111:4,10,15,19 114:8, 16 115:10 117:2 118:4 120:19 125:24 127:21 128:2,4 132:15,23 140:1, 20 141:3,22 142:9 143:17 144:5,20,23 151:12,21,22 152:9,14,19,24 153:7 157:2 166:13,20 171:16 198:2 201:9,23 229:12 230:16

year's 35:23 145:6 229:5

yearly 31:8

years 13:16 20:10 37:3 90:23 132:2 148:19 149:11 158:24 166:12 176:21,22 207:18

Yes/no 169:18



i23

electronic classroom of tomorrow vs. … wilhelm.pdf · vs. ohio department of education deposition...

Documents