Anonymous wrote:DCI parent here. I've just started engaging with the parent efforts to call attention to issues at DCI and am very surprised at the number of parents who are involved. This is not just a few disgruntled parents. This is a tsunami. The board and the executive director need to take this more seriously. There seems to be a large number of students who are organizing as well.

And the students are organizing a walk out now tomorrow. Imagine being that disliked by staff, students, and parents and still refusing to resign. It’s not like he needs the job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ED needs to do the right thing and resign. If he had any integrity or concern about the welfare of the school he would understand that he is too polarizing a figure to lead competently. The board needs to help him do this in a way that reduces the tension that is impacting every group in the school community. This incredible school needs healing.

Rosskamm and Pardo are hell bent on destroying the school and making as much money off of it while they do so. Everyone is asking him to resign and he's digging in.

How are they making money off DCI?

Rosskamm is paid almost $300k in total compensation. That's exponentially more than Mary Shaffner, the woman who founded DCI and built it from zero to a Tier 1 school. She never took a bonus. He took $56,500 in bonus and incentive pay in the same year the school structured aide raises to be effectively worthless. And then he hired his wife as a consultant at DCI.

And Pardo was a partner at TenSquare, the firm at the center of DC's biggest charter school governance scandal.

I can see why it's hard for some to understand and take all of the concerns seriously -- though I do agree there are real concerns that need to be addressed. Claiming that two individuals are intent on destroying the school and making as much money as possible off of it but then giving no real evidence of this -- just undermines the real concerns that must be addressed. Is there evidence that Pardo is making money off DCI? As far as the EDs salaries, the difference seems to be 15-20% - higher, yes, but not clear that it's unreasonably higher.

The salary comparison is one data point. The bigger picture is in the financials. Between FY2023 and FY2024, leadership salaries at DCI jumped from $1.876 million to $3.196 million which is an increase of over $1.3 million in a single year.

In that same period, staff development spending was cut 41%, from $305,770 to $179,590. At a school whose staff letter specifically documents inadequate IB training as a core program concern.

There’s a pattern of financial decisions that consistently prioritize leadership compensation while cutting the resources that actually serve students and support the people who teach them.

This is a serious issue and now I'm worried about corruption too.

New DCI parent, who signed the petition too.

And unfortunately this is the problem when people only give part of the financial information, choose to highlight only certain line items, and clearly don't take the time to read financial statements vs having AI spit out talking points to try to support their argument. PLEASE don't take those shortcuts when you potentially have legitimate issues to raise. I'm the person who said I don't have a horse in the DCI race, but I read this thread because I am interested in having strong schools across all sectors in DC. I'm offering this as advice to teachers and staff, having been employed in schools and various education non-profits for a long time and wanting to ensure that if there are legitimate issues that those are strong arguments for a vote of no confidence. I still don't see them based on looking at the provided information, and I would encourage you to continue to surface the facts as much as possible.

If you actually look at the audited financial statements, it's true that leadership salaries increased from $1.876 million to $3.196 million from 2023 to 2024. It's also true that during that time teaching and staff salaries increased from $15.094 million to $17.006 million and student support staff salaries increase from $1.459 million to $2.251 million. Employee benefit expenses also increased from $2.558 million to $3.795 million (you can't tell from the financials who those benefits went to). "Other personnel expenses" decreased from $493k to $44k. Contracted student instruction (considered a direct student cost rather than a personnel expense) increased from $545k to $1.970 million, but saying that there was a $1.4 million increase in contracted student instruction expenses (tutors? Contracted instructional staff?), a $2 million increase in staff salaries, and a $800k increase in support staff salaries doesn't support the "leadership is bad" argument so it was conveniently left out. It's also worth noting that in 2023, no teachers are listed in the top 7 highest compensated employees but in 2024, three teachers are listed in the top 7 highest compensated employees.

All that to say - there is not a directly proportional increase in leadership salary and benefits vs teaching/support staff salaries and benefits (or costs for direct student instruction), and there is clearly a greater percentage increase for leadership, but it's not completely out of line. It's also unclear which positions were classified as "leadership" in 2023 vs 2024 and if any positions were reclassified, but I wouldn't go nearly so far to say that there is evidence of corruption based on the available data. Looking at the audited 990s makes that clear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ED needs to do the right thing and resign. If he had any integrity or concern about the welfare of the school he would understand that he is too polarizing a figure to lead competently. The board needs to help him do this in a way that reduces the tension that is impacting every group in the school community. This incredible school needs healing.

Rosskamm and Pardo are hell bent on destroying the school and making as much money off of it while they do so. Everyone is asking him to resign and he's digging in.

How are they making money off DCI?

Rosskamm is paid almost $300k in total compensation. That's exponentially more than Mary Shaffner, the woman who founded DCI and built it from zero to a Tier 1 school. She never took a bonus. He took $56,500 in bonus and incentive pay in the same year the school structured aide raises to be effectively worthless. And then he hired his wife as a consultant at DCI.

And Pardo was a partner at TenSquare, the firm at the center of DC's biggest charter school governance scandal.

I can see why it's hard for some to understand and take all of the concerns seriously -- though I do agree there are real concerns that need to be addressed. Claiming that two individuals are intent on destroying the school and making as much money as possible off of it but then giving no real evidence of this -- just undermines the real concerns that must be addressed. Is there evidence that Pardo is making money off DCI? As far as the EDs salaries, the difference seems to be 15-20% - higher, yes, but not clear that it's unreasonably higher.

The salary comparison is one data point. The bigger picture is in the financials. Between FY2023 and FY2024, leadership salaries at DCI jumped from $1.876 million to $3.196 million which is an increase of over $1.3 million in a single year.

In that same period, staff development spending was cut 41%, from $305,770 to $179,590. At a school whose staff letter specifically documents inadequate IB training as a core program concern.

There’s a pattern of financial decisions that consistently prioritize leadership compensation while cutting the resources that actually serve students and support the people who teach them.

This is a serious issue and now I'm worried about corruption too.

New DCI parent, who signed the petition too.

DCI parent here. I've just started engaging with the parent efforts to call attention to issues at DCI and am very surprised at the number of parents who are involved. This is not just a few disgruntled parents. This is a tsunami. The board and the executive director need to take this more seriously. There seems to be a large number of students who are organizing as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ED needs to do the right thing and resign. If he had any integrity or concern about the welfare of the school he would understand that he is too polarizing a figure to lead competently. The board needs to help him do this in a way that reduces the tension that is impacting every group in the school community. This incredible school needs healing.

Rosskamm and Pardo are hell bent on destroying the school and making as much money off of it while they do so. Everyone is asking him to resign and he's digging in.

How are they making money off DCI?

Rosskamm is paid almost $300k in total compensation. That's exponentially more than Mary Shaffner, the woman who founded DCI and built it from zero to a Tier 1 school. She never took a bonus. He took $56,500 in bonus and incentive pay in the same year the school structured aide raises to be effectively worthless. And then he hired his wife as a consultant at DCI.

And Pardo was a partner at TenSquare, the firm at the center of DC's biggest charter school governance scandal.

I can see why it's hard for some to understand and take all of the concerns seriously -- though I do agree there are real concerns that need to be addressed. Claiming that two individuals are intent on destroying the school and making as much money as possible off of it but then giving no real evidence of this -- just undermines the real concerns that must be addressed. Is there evidence that Pardo is making money off DCI? As far as the EDs salaries, the difference seems to be 15-20% - higher, yes, but not clear that it's unreasonably higher.

The salary comparison is one data point. The bigger picture is in the financials. Between FY2023 and FY2024, leadership salaries at DCI jumped from $1.876 million to $3.196 million which is an increase of over $1.3 million in a single year.

In that same period, staff development spending was cut 41%, from $305,770 to $179,590. At a school whose staff letter specifically documents inadequate IB training as a core program concern.

There’s a pattern of financial decisions that consistently prioritize leadership compensation while cutting the resources that actually serve students and support the people who teach them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ED needs to do the right thing and resign. If he had any integrity or concern about the welfare of the school he would understand that he is too polarizing a figure to lead competently. The board needs to help him do this in a way that reduces the tension that is impacting every group in the school community. This incredible school needs healing.

Rosskamm and Pardo are hell bent on destroying the school and making as much money off of it while they do so. Everyone is asking him to resign and he's digging in.

How are they making money off DCI?

Rosskamm is paid almost $300k in total compensation. That's exponentially more than Mary Shaffner, the woman who founded DCI and built it from zero to a Tier 1 school. She never took a bonus. He took $56,500 in bonus and incentive pay in the same year the school structured aide raises to be effectively worthless. And then he hired his wife as a consultant at DCI.

And Pardo was a partner at TenSquare, the firm at the center of DC's biggest charter school governance scandal.

I can see why it's hard for some to understand and take all of the concerns seriously -- though I do agree there are real concerns that need to be addressed. Claiming that two individuals are intent on destroying the school and making as much money as possible off of it but then giving no real evidence of this -- just undermines the real concerns that must be addressed. Is there evidence that Pardo is making money off DCI? As far as the EDs salaries, the difference seems to be 15-20% - higher, yes, but not clear that it's unreasonably higher.

How am I supposed to feel that a mediocre biggish-law firm wants to get paid to run an investigation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The clock-in issue is one bullet point in a six-page letter that documents potential legal violations, a nepotism concern, a $56,500 executive bonus while aides took home less than last year, 37 special education staff departures affecting nearly 500 students with IEPs, and an ED who made a documented false statement to a community member.

If the only thing in that letter were the clock-in policy, you'd be right to dismiss it. But it isn't and the repeated focus on that one point while ignoring everything else isn't engaging with the actual case being made.

And the letter isn't objecting to accountability. It's objecting to deductions applied in increments as small as 0.1 hours for arriving six minutes late when staff have no in-person duties. That's not accountability. That's punitive micromanagement designed to make people miserable enough to leave.

The letter asks for staff and parent voice in the process, not staff control. Those are different things. A search committee with community representation is standard governance practice at healthy schools.

On your LAMB experience: one bad outcome from a flawed process isn't an argument against community involvement in leadership searches. It's an argument for doing it better. The alternative you're describing, leaving it entirely to a board that appointed an investigator with a 6-figure financial relationship to the school, is not obviously safer.

I don't have a horse in this race as I'm not part of the DCI community, but I will say that this poster consistently using AI to write their arguments (the "it's not this, it's that" over and over again is a dead giveaway) doesn't strengthen them in any way. As an outside observer who's been in the education community for a while but doesn't directly know any of the parties involved, there isn't anything in the letter that would warrant a vote of no confidence. Should aides be paid more? Yes - and that's true in every school. The bonus isn't the ED's choice. If you want to complain about that you should blame the board. The "documented false statement to a community member" is blown up way more than what it actually is. Legal and nepotism concerns warrant investigation but from what I see in the letter there doesn't seem to be an issue there. And that many staff departures definitely doesn't sound good, though I don't know the circumstances there. So while there may be legitimate issues, the letter doesn't really support that cause.

Sure you don't have a horse in this race. And of course AI is being used. The point is that the arguments are sourced from the 6-page staff letter, a Form 990, an audited financial statement, DC law, and McGuireWoods' own website. The structure of the argument reflects the structure of the evidence. The documents are real and publicly available for anyone to verify.

Also the board approves comp. The board approved a $56,500 bonus for the ED while simultaneously approving a pay structure that left some aides taking home less than last year despite negotiated raises. That's a board governance failure and the board is exactly who we're holding accountable.

The ED told an alum that conversations about the DP Coordinator's future at DCI were ongoing. They were not. He was confronted with this and only then did those conversations begin. At a school whose entire disciplinary and cultural framework is built on IB learner profile values, including being principled and acting with integrity, the ED making a documented false statement to a community member is not a minor footnote. It is a character issue.

And I don't see how you see no issue with the staff letter. 175 staff members who work in that building every day disagreed with you. They have direct knowledge you and I don't have. The letter is the public-facing summary of three years of documented failed attempts to address concerns through proper channels.

All we've asked for is an independent investigation with a clearly defined scope, conducted by a firm without a current financial relationship to the school, led by a board chair without conflicts of her own. What we have instead is McGuireWoods, who was paid $130,000 by DCI in the same fiscal year they were appointed, investigating concerns raised by a unionized staff, selected by a board chair who is a partner at the firm at the center of DC's most documented charter school governance scandal.

Repeating the same thing over and over again doesn’t make it more convincing.

Forgetting to tell Chat to be concise honestly just makes it more frustrating.

Anonymous wrote:There's a lot interest in this thread from folks who don't have a vested interest. Curious how they found this threat given that lack.
- "I don't have a horse in this race as I'm not part of the DCI community"
- "I am not a DCI parent"

I haven't posted but have been reading. My kids might have gone and concerns about stability at DCI was a reasons we left our feeder after 4th. I really want the school to succeed. DC needs high quality middle schools, I think charters can be a solution if done well, a strong school in my neighborhood would be great even if my kids don't benefit directly their neighbors and friends will.

Among their friends there, many are happy overall but a common complaint is that they have long term subs, teachers leaving mid-year etc. I feel like that's a problem worth trying to solve.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ED needs to do the right thing and resign. If he had any integrity or concern about the welfare of the school he would understand that he is too polarizing a figure to lead competently. The board needs to help him do this in a way that reduces the tension that is impacting every group in the school community. This incredible school needs healing.

Rosskamm and Pardo are hell bent on destroying the school and making as much money off of it while they do so. Everyone is asking him to resign and he's digging in.

How are they making money off DCI?

Rosskamm is paid almost $300k in total compensation. That's exponentially more than Mary Shaffner, the woman who founded DCI and built it from zero to a Tier 1 school. She never took a bonus. He took $56,500 in bonus and incentive pay in the same year the school structured aide raises to be effectively worthless. And then he hired his wife as a consultant at DCI.

And Pardo was a partner at TenSquare, the firm at the center of DC's biggest charter school governance scandal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ED needs to do the right thing and resign. If he had any integrity or concern about the welfare of the school he would understand that he is too polarizing a figure to lead competently. The board needs to help him do this in a way that reduces the tension that is impacting every group in the school community. This incredible school needs healing.

Rosskamm and Pardo are hell bent on destroying the school and making as much money off of it while they do so. Everyone is asking him to resign and he's digging in.

How are they making money off DCI?

Anonymous wrote:The ED needs to do the right thing and resign. If he had any integrity or concern about the welfare of the school he would understand that he is too polarizing a figure to lead competently. The board needs to help him do this in a way that reduces the tension that is impacting every group in the school community. This incredible school needs healing.

Rosskamm and Pardo are hell bent on destroying the school and making as much money off of it while they do so. Everyone is asking him to resign and he's digging in.

There's a lot interest in this thread from folks who don't have a vested interest. Curious how they found this threat given that lack.
- "I don't have a horse in this race as I'm not part of the DCI community"
- "I am not a DCI parent"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Different poster- from my lamb experience with ED turnover- I just don’t think it’s a good idea for staff to dictate that an ED must go.

Eventually the staff at lamb ran the show. Some teachers were excellent. Some teachers were terrible. You could do very little if you had a terrible situation. The current ED stays afloat hiding from issues and avoiding taking a position. You don’t want that, especially in a high school. It’s vital to have an ED that makes hard and often unpopular decisions.

Like making custodians come in to mop clean floors over spring break just to get their full paycheck?

I am not a DCI parent, but I have worked at a school before and the janitorial / maintenance hours + calendar is sometimes different than the rest of the school calendar. Often times there is cleaning or maintenance work required that is better done when school is not in session (which makes sense). This is pretty standard. Of course, this expectation should be laid out clearly in advance to impacted staff.

You're right that maintenance work during breaks is standard and makes sense. Nobody is arguing against that.

The specific allegation in the staff letter isn't that custodians worked over break. It's that under the pay structure Rosskamm put in place, custodians were required to come in on days when no one else was in the building; not because there was work to do, but because the hourly structure required them to log enough hours to receive their correct pay. The building wasn't being used. The floors weren't dirty. They came in to meet an arbitrary hour threshold created by a compensation structure that Rosskamm chose to implement despite staff objections.

That's not standard maintenance scheduling. That's a pay structure so poorly designed that it forced people to perform performative labor just to earn what they were owed. And this happened at a school with a multi-million dollar surplus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The clock-in issue is one bullet point in a six-page letter that documents potential legal violations, a nepotism concern, a $56,500 executive bonus while aides took home less than last year, 37 special education staff departures affecting nearly 500 students with IEPs, and an ED who made a documented false statement to a community member.

If the only thing in that letter were the clock-in policy, you'd be right to dismiss it. But it isn't and the repeated focus on that one point while ignoring everything else isn't engaging with the actual case being made.

And the letter isn't objecting to accountability. It's objecting to deductions applied in increments as small as 0.1 hours for arriving six minutes late when staff have no in-person duties. That's not accountability. That's punitive micromanagement designed to make people miserable enough to leave.

The letter asks for staff and parent voice in the process, not staff control. Those are different things. A search committee with community representation is standard governance practice at healthy schools.

On your LAMB experience: one bad outcome from a flawed process isn't an argument against community involvement in leadership searches. It's an argument for doing it better. The alternative you're describing, leaving it entirely to a board that appointed an investigator with a 6-figure financial relationship to the school, is not obviously safer.

I don't have a horse in this race as I'm not part of the DCI community, but I will say that this poster consistently using AI to write their arguments (the "it's not this, it's that" over and over again is a dead giveaway) doesn't strengthen them in any way. As an outside observer who's been in the education community for a while but doesn't directly know any of the parties involved, there isn't anything in the letter that would warrant a vote of no confidence. Should aides be paid more? Yes - and that's true in every school. The bonus isn't the ED's choice. If you want to complain about that you should blame the board. The "documented false statement to a community member" is blown up way more than what it actually is. Legal and nepotism concerns warrant investigation but from what I see in the letter there doesn't seem to be an issue there. And that many staff departures definitely doesn't sound good, though I don't know the circumstances there. So while there may be legitimate issues, the letter doesn't really support that cause.

Sure you don't have a horse in this race. And of course AI is being used. The point is that the arguments are sourced from the 6-page staff letter, a Form 990, an audited financial statement, DC law, and McGuireWoods' own website. The structure of the argument reflects the structure of the evidence. The documents are real and publicly available for anyone to verify.

Also the board approves comp. The board approved a $56,500 bonus for the ED while simultaneously approving a pay structure that left some aides taking home less than last year despite negotiated raises. That's a board governance failure and the board is exactly who we're holding accountable.

The ED told an alum that conversations about the DP Coordinator's future at DCI were ongoing. They were not. He was confronted with this and only then did those conversations begin. At a school whose entire disciplinary and cultural framework is built on IB learner profile values, including being principled and acting with integrity, the ED making a documented false statement to a community member is not a minor footnote. It is a character issue.

And I don't see how you see no issue with the staff letter. 175 staff members who work in that building every day disagreed with you. They have direct knowledge you and I don't have. The letter is the public-facing summary of three years of documented failed attempts to address concerns through proper channels.

All we've asked for is an independent investigation with a clearly defined scope, conducted by a firm without a current financial relationship to the school, led by a board chair without conflicts of her own. What we have instead is McGuireWoods, who was paid $130,000 by DCI in the same fiscal year they were appointed, investigating concerns raised by a unionized staff, selected by a board chair who is a partner at the firm at the center of DC's most documented charter school governance scandal.