Source: http://elighthouse.isolon.org/the-quest-for-controversial-salary-statistics-from-the-maryland-state-department-of-education
Timestamp: 2020-04-03 01:53:57
Document Index: 586014729

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 20', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10']

The Quest for Controversial Salary Statistics from the Maryland State Department of Education | eLighthouse.info
The Quest for Controversial Salary Statistics from the Maryland State Department of Education
From: ‘William Reinhard -MSDE’
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 5:04 PM
Good Afternoon Mr. Snider-
You recently emailed MSDE with a second follow-up set of questions posed under the Maryland Public Information Act, in search of additional information regarding its annual salary report.
The following answers to your questions are responsive to your request.
MSDE defines the standard work week as 40 hours, but some school districts have a standard work week for teachers that is less than 40 hours. For example, the contractually negotiated work week in Anne Arundel County for ten-month teachers is 37.5 hours. I request the document MSDE uses that specifies in detail how FTEs are to be calculated for all teachers; for example, that specifies that a 37.5 hour/week employee can be treated as a 40 hour/week employee for purposes of calculating FTEs and that specifies that a full-time ten-month and twelve-month teacher will both be treated as a 1.0 FTE.
No additional documentation is available other than the definition previously provided.
I request links to the audits MSDE has done, if any, on the salary data LEAs have provided to MSDE from FY2007 through FY2016. If no audits have been done, please respond “none.”
To my request for “a description of the procedures used to detect and punish local school districts that provide incorrect actual and average salary data,” you replied “no penalties.” Am I correct to infer from this response that MSDE has no such description of procedures independent of an actual audit? If not, I request a copy of the written procedure.
You are correct. Local systems provide us with information they deem to be correct.
In response to my two Public Information Act requests, you provided me with a clear and simple operational definition of “mid-level salaries,” but I haven’t seen any written documentary definition. Am I correct to infer that MSDE has not provided LEA’s with a definition in the form of a written document? If not, I request documentation to LEAs that specifies how “mid-level salary” is defined.
No additional documentation other than the definition previously provided.
In Excel or other machine-readable format, I request all salary data, including any accompanying annotations, submitted to MSDE’s Web Data Collection System (WDCS) by the Anne Arundel County LEA from FY2012 to FY2016. It’s my understanding that because this is aggregate data, the files will be tiny.
Data published is as provided by LEAs.
http://archives.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/planningresultstest/2011+-+2012+Staff+Publications.htm
http://archives.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/planningresultstest/2012+-+2013+Staff+Publications.htm
http://archives.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/planningresultstest/2013+-+2014+Staff+Publications.htm
http://archives.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/planningresultstest/2014+-+2015+Staff+Publications.html
http://archives.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/planningresultstest/2015-2016-Staff-Publications.html
In Excel or other machine-readable format, I request all teacher retention data, including any accompanying annotations, submitted to MSDE’s Web Data Collection System (WDCS) by the Anne Arundel County LEA from FY2012 to FY2016. It’s my understanding that because this is aggregate data, the files will be tiny.
No current report exists for this information and would require several days to create. As this request is LEA specific, please make inquiry to Anne Arundel County.
Retention and attrition data is currently published here:
https://wcp.k12lds.memsdc.org/webcenter/faces/oracle/webcenter/page/scopedMD/s48574f5c_7645_4759_8b6d_76ca2d46b8ac/Page9.jspx?wc.contextURL=%2Fspaces%2Ftra&_adf.ctrl-state=gz5krgl35_43&scope=tra&visibility=visible&_afrLoop=6667316395065587
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 2:01 PM
My apologies, Mr. Snider, I received info for you during the holiday break. You’ll have it this week.
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 1:53 PM, J.H. Snider wrote:
Dear Mr. Reinhard:
Thank you again for your reply to my November 15, 2016 Public Information Act request.
Please update me on your plans for fulfilling my December 16, 2016 Public Information Act request. Maryland’s Public Information Act specifies a ten-day reply period.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 3:51 PM, J.H. Snider wrote:
Thank you for your timely reply to my November 15, 2016 Public Information Act request regarding LEA staff compensation statistics. Your links to supporting documents have been especially helpful.
To help me better understand the nature of the provided information, I am requesting the following clarifying documents under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article (SG) §§ 10-611, et seq:
If you expect to spend more than two hours fulfilling this Public Information Act request, I request a public interest fee waiver. Approximately 80% of local public school budgets in Maryland is allocated to employee compensation. MSDE statistics about average compensation is routinely published in Maryland newspapers. It is in the best interests of the public that it understands the methodology behind those statistics. I expect to report my findings in one of the Maryland-related newspapers for which I have often written, including the Washington Post, Baltimore Sun, or Education Week.
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 5:45 PM
Good Afternoon Mr. Snider:
You followed up your original Public Information Act request with a second request. The following is an attempt to answer each question you have asked.
Much of what you are requesting is not available at MSDE. For that information you will have to contact local school system.
The original request referenced page 13 of the Maryland State Department of Education Fact Book: 2014-2015). These salaries are self-reported by LEAs. Salary scales for teachers are uploaded in a text file. The submission window closes on or around September 15th of each year. These salaries are not calculated or manipulated in any way by MSDE. Salaries are compiled and reported in the Professional Salary Schedules publication.
The second request referenced page 12 of the Maryland State Department of Education Fact Book: 2014-2015). The salaries that are used to calculate the average salaries are reported by LEAs to MSDE. The submission window closes on or around November 15th of each year. The average salaries on the table referenced on page 12 are calculated and based on the salary and FTE information as provided by each LEA. Teachers as identified on page 12 of the Fact Book include classroom and other teachers, therapists, librarians, guidance counselors, and school psychologists. Additional information reported in the Analysis of Professional Salaries publication.
1) The detailed methodology MSDE used to calculate the “Mid-Level Salaries” as you have defined it in your response to 1) in my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request.
Mid-Level Salaries on page 13 are not calculated. See step 11 on pages 9 and 11 in the Professional Salary Schedules publication. Mid-Level Salaries are determined and managed by each LEA.
http://archives.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/planningresultstest/doc/20152016Staff/2016_Salary_Schedules_20151106.pdf
2) The detailed methodology MSDE used to calculate the “Average Salaries for Instructional Positions in Public schools: 2014-2015 (page 12 of the Maryland State Department of Education Fact Book: 2014-2015). This should clarify whether “average salary” and “mid-level salary” are defined as synonyms.
See the introduction page in the Analysis of Professional Salaries publication, referenced above.
Introduction: The tables in this report were prepared from the data submitted by the 24 Maryland public school systems in the fall of 2015. Salaries include annual pay for 10, 11, and 12 month full-time and part-time employees in the positions shown. All data reported reflect the conversion of part-time employees to full-time equivalents.
Calculations: The average (mean) salaries are computed by dividing the sum of the individuals’ salaries by the sum of the full-time-equivalent positions. The value of the means may be distorted by extremely high or low salaries in the distribution and so may not provide an accurate estimate of population averages. Therefore, medians (middle values) are also provided as estimates of typical salaries. The median represents the salary that divides the group in half. The first and third quartiles are provided as an estimation of the distribution of salaries across groups. Quartiles represent a division point similar to the median. The first quartile indicates the salary below which twenty-five percent of salaries fall while the third quartile represents the point above which twenty-five percent of salaries fall.
Link http://archives.marylandpublicschools.org/MSDE/divisions/planningresultstest/doc/20152016Staff/2016_AnalysProSal.pdf
3) The detailed methodology MSDE provided to local public schools to generate the data described in 2) above. For example, it should clarify whether National Board Certification is included in the average salary statistic; it should include deadlines for the submission of data (vital information not included in the manual provided in response to my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request); and it should include guidance, if any exists, regarding how to calculate negotiated salary schedules that change mid-year or at any time other than the start of a given fiscal year.
Each LEA manages salary information for staff. MSDE requests the information as follows:
Report annual salaries for the 2015-2016 school year, including bonuses, stipends, etc. Report the portion of the annual salary for each part of the position to the nearest dollar. For staff who have multiple records (one Type I and one or more Type II records), the parts of the salary must add up to the total salary. (Not for staff who resigned or left the school system on or after October 16, 2014.)
Note: MSDE does not provide clarification or guidance in regards to specific bonuses or stipends to include in the salary information provided to MSDE. Each LEA manages salary information and MSDE reports as provided by the LEAs.
4) Any explanation why some teachers and pay codes/categories are not included in the data described in 2) and 3) above (e.g., why non-ten-month teachers and FTEs less than 1.0 aren’t normalized for statistical purposes as ten-month teachers). For example, when I have normalized less than 1.0 FTE “teachers” (defined as employees covered by the teachers’ contract), I have gotten results (e.g., normalized salaries over $200,000/year) that are well outside the minimum and maximum range of any Maryland public school system salary scale.
Information reported by MSDE is based on information as provided by the LEAs as noted. See the introduction page in the Analysis of Professional Salaries publication and Response to Question 2.
5) A list of all the database fields relating to average teacher compensation that MSDE gathers from local public school districts. Any abbreviations for field names should be accompanied by a description of the field in standard written English (e.g., without inscrutable abbreviations). The manual that was provided to me (p. 3) only includes the following instructions regarding the reporting of “actual salary”: “Please do not include fringe benefits, bonuses, etc.” I presume (perhaps incorrectly) that “actual salaries” for ten-month teachers are used to calculate their “average salary.” But if the “mid-level” method described above is used, that would be an incorrect presumption.
The information used to calculate average teacher compensation is as provided by the LEAs. The two fields that are used are:
Data definition provided to LEAs: Report annual salaries for the 2015-2016 school year, including bonuses, stipends, etc. Report the portion of the annual salary for each part of the position to the nearest dollar. For staff who have multiple records the parts of the salary must add up to the total salary. (Not for staff who resigned or left the school system on or after October 16, 2014.)
Data definition provided to LEAs: The four-digit FTE code (expressed to three decimal points) computed on the basis of a standard work week (40 hours).
Full-Time (40 hours/week – all assignments together) Report FTE as 1000
Half-Time (20 hours/week – all assignments together) Report FTE as 0500
¼ Time (10 hours/week – all assignments together) Report FTE as 0250
As noted in the introduction page in the Analysis of Professional Salaries publication, all data reported reflect the conversion of part-time employees to full-time equivalents.
6) The precise formulas MSDE uses to calculate average salary from salary-related fields (e.g., from specific pay codes/categories, FTEs, and leave accumulations that can be converted into salary).
The information used to calculate average teacher compensation is as provided by the LEAs.
See the introduction page in the Analysis of Professional Salaries publication and Response to Question 2.
7) The description provided to local school districts of the average compensation related data accessible to at least one local public school district officer but behind MSDE’s firewall (i.e., that requires a user to login to access the information).
Information is submitted electronically by LEAs in MSDE’s Web Data Collection System (WDCS). Each LEA has access to view the information as submitted to MSDE.
8) A description of the procedures used to detect and penalize local school districts that provide incorrect actual and average salary data.
9) The manual MSDE data operators use to manage the local public school average compensation data provided by local Maryland public school districts. I’m presuming that such a manual exists (or other written materials) because the manual provided in response to my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request lacked instructions relating to average salaries.
Each LEA manages the local public school compensation information. Each LEA calculates Salary and FTE and reports to MSDE. The average compensation data is based on the salary and FTE record as provided by each LEA.
We hope this has clarified for you how these publications are put together.
william.reinhard@maryland.gov
410-767-0486 (office)
Follow MSDE on Twitter @MdPublicSchools and join us on Facebook at MdPublicSchools
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 1:45 PM
It is in process, Mr. Snider.
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 1:28 PM, ‘J.H. Snider’ wrote:
Thank you again for your timely reply to my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request.
Please update me on your plans for fulfilling my November 15, 2016 Public Information Act request. Maryland’s Public Information Act specifies a ten-day reply period.
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 3:34 PM
To: ‘William Reinhard -MSDE’
Thank you for your prompt reply to my November 3, 2016 Maryland Public Information Act request.
I have questions regarding some of your responses:
1) The detailed methodology MSDE used to calculate the “Salary Range for Ten-Month Teachers in Public School: 2014-2015 (page 13 of the Maryland State Department of Education Fact Book: 2014-2015);
Reinhard: MSDE does not calculate the salaries for this report. LEAs self-report salary scales for ten-month teachers. “Beginning” salaries are the salaries on Step 1 of the Bachelor’s salary scale (User Manual, page 5), “Mid-level” salaries are the salaries on Step 11 of the Master’s salary scale (User Manual, page 5), “Maximum” is the maximum Doctorate salary (User Manual, page 3).
Snider: Beginning and Maximum Salaries: If I understand you correctly, the statistics for “beginning salaries” and “maximum salaries” do not include all pay codes related to salary, just the pay code relating to a 1.0 FTE position on the salary grid for ten-month teachers. For example, in my Maryland county that would mean that only one of 70+ pay codes would be included in the definition of “beginning salary” or “maximum salary.”
Mid-Level Salaries: Are you saying that “average salary” as defined, say, on page 12 of the of the Maryland State Department of Education Fact Book: 2014-2015, actually means “mid-level salary” as you have defined it above? Also, there was no definition of “mid-level” salary on page 5 of the attached manual. Please send me the document that is the source of the information to which you refer in your reply.
Maximum Salaries: There is no explanation in the manual why maximum teacher salary is defined as the top position on the salary schedule but other maximum salaries (p. 3) appear to be defined based on actual salary. There is also no definition for “actual salary” except for the following cryptic note that appears to me to provide virtually no useful information regarding the 70+ pay codes that some districts use to calculate pay: “Please do not include fringe benefits, bonuses, etc.” If such written information exists, please provide a) a precise definition of “actual salary,” and b) a justification for using two fundamentally different methods (one based on actual salary and the other a salary schedule) for calculating maximum salary.
2) The detailed methodology MSDE provided to local public schools to generate the data described in 1) above;
Reinhard: See 1 above.
Snider: As noted above, the manual provided in response to my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request was missing the cited information regarding how “mid-level” salaries were calculated.
4) A list of all the database fields relating to teacher compensation and reimbursements that MSDE gathers from local public school districts. Any abbreviations for field names should be accompanied by a description of the field in standard written English (e.g., without inscrutable abbreviations);
Reinhard: See pages 3 and 4 in the User Manual.
Snider: If I understand your response correctly, MSDE collects no information relating to what the provided manual describes as “fringe benefits, bonuses, etc.” and what I would describe as all non-salary schedule pay codes plus insurance and pension benefits; that is, all the well-defined forms of compensation negotiated in compensation contracts with school employees except, say, in the case of “teachers,” the relevant teacher salary scale for 1.0 FTE ten-month teachers.
Given the lack of information regarding how MSDE defines “average salaries” in response to my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request, I am requesting the following documents under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article (SG) §§ 10-611, et seq:
The detailed methodology MSDE used to calculate the “Mid-Level Salaries” as you have defined it in your response to 1) in my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request.
The detailed methodology MSDE used to calculate the “Average Salaries for Instructional Positions in Public schools: 2014-2015 (page 12 of the Maryland State Department of Education Fact Book: 2014-2015). This should clarify whether “average salary” and “mid-level salary” are defined as synonyms.
The detailed methodology MSDE provided to local public schools to generate the data described in 2) above. For example, it should clarify whether National Board Certification is included in the average salary statistic; it should include deadlines for the submission of data (vital information not included in the manual provided in response to my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request); and it should include guidance, if any exists, regarding how to calculate negotiated salary schedules that change mid-year or at any time other than the start of a given fiscal year.
Any explanation why some teachers and pay codes/categories are not included in the data described in 2) and 3) above (e.g., why non-ten-month teachers and FTEs less than 1.0 aren’t normalized for statistical purposes as ten-month teachers). For example, when I have normalized less than 1.0 FTE “teachers” (defined as employees covered by the teachers’ contract), I have gotten results (e.g., normalized salaries over $200,000/year) that are well outside the minimum and maximum range of any Maryland public school system salary scale.
A list of all the database fields relating to average teacher compensation that MSDE gathers from local public school districts. Any abbreviations for field names should be accompanied by a description of the field in standard written English (e.g., without inscrutable abbreviations). The manual that was provided to me (p. 3) only includes the following instructions regarding the reporting of “actual salary”: “Please do not include fringe benefits, bonuses, etc.” I presume (perhaps incorrectly) that “actual salaries” for ten-month teachers are used to calculate their “average salary.” But if the “mid-level” method described above is used, that would be an incorrect presumption.
The precise formulas MSDE uses to calculate average salary from salary-related fields (e.g., from specific pay codes/categories, FTEs, and leave accumulations that can be converted into salary).
The description provided to local school districts of the average compensation related data accessible to at least one local public school district officer but behind MSDE’s firewall (i.e., that requires a user to login to access the information).
A description of the procedures used to detect and penalize local school districts that provide incorrect actual and average salary data.
The manual MSDE data operators use to manage the local public school average compensation data provided by local Maryland public school districts. I’m presuming that such a manual exists (or other written materials) because the manual provided in response to my November 3, 2016 Public Information Act request lacked instructions relating to average salaries.
There may be some overlap in information for requests 1) through 9). If so, there is no need for duplication in providing your responses.
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 2:34 PM
Dear Mr. Snider-
You recently emailed MSDE under the Maryland Public Information Act in search of a variety of information regarding its annual salary report.
The following, and the attached, are responsive to your request.
MSDE does not calculate the salaries for this report. LEAs self-report salary scales for ten-month teachers. “Beginning” salaries are the salaries on Step 1 of the Bachelor’s salary scale (User Manual, page 5), “Mid-level” salaries are the salaries on Step 11 of the Master’s salary scale (User Manual, page 5), “Maximum” is the maximum Doctorate salary (User Manual, page 3).
3) Any written explanation of why some teachers and pay codes/categories are not included in the data described in 1) and 2) above (e.g., why non ten-month teachers aren’t normalized for statistical purposes as ten-month teachers).
MSDE does not calculate the salaries for this report. These are salary scales for ten-month teachers.
See pages 3 and 4 in the User Manual.
5) The precise formulas MSDE uses to calculate some fields (e.g., total salary) from other compensation-related fields (e.g., specific pay codes/categories, FTE, and leave accumulations);
MSDE does not perform any calculations for this report.
6) A description of the compensation and reimbursement related data accessible to at least one local public school district officer but behind MSDE’s firewall (i.e., that requires a user to login to access the information); and
Salaries are submitted electronically by LEAs in MSDE’s Web Data Collection System (WDCS). See page 1 in the User Manual.
7) The manual MSDE data operators use to manage the local public school compensation and reimbursement data provided by local Maryland public school districts.
The Minimum/Maximum/Actual Salaries and Salary Schedules User Manual is attached.
Attached is a copy of the user’s manual.
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 3:59 PM
Subject: Maryland Public Information Act request
Under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article (SG) §§ 10-611, et seq., I request that you provide me with the following documents:
The detailed methodology MSDE used to calculate the “Salary Range for Ten-Month Teachers in Public School: 2014-2015 (page 13 of the Maryland State Department of Education Fact Book: 2014-2015);
The detailed methodology MSDE provided to local public schools to generate the data described in 1) above;
Any written explanation of why some teachers and pay codes/categories are not included in the data described in 1) and 2) above (e.g., why non ten-month teachers aren’t normalized for statistical purposes as ten-month teachers).
A list of all the database fields relating to teacher compensation and reimbursements that MSDE gathers from local public school districts. Any abbreviations for field names should be accompanied by a description of the field in standard written English (e.g., without inscrutable abbreviations);
The precise formulas MSDE uses to calculate some fields (e.g., total salary) from other compensation-related fields (e.g., specific pay codes/categories, FTE, and leave accumulations);
A description of the compensation and reimbursement related data accessible to at least one local public school district officer but behind MSDE’s firewall (i.e., that requires a user to login to access the information); and
The manual MSDE data operators use to manage the local public school compensation and reimbursement data provided by local Maryland public school districts.
There may be some overlap in information for requests 1) through 7). If so, there is no need for duplication in providing your responses. For example, it might be that 7) provides all the data for 1) through 6), in which case providing 7) would be adequate to fulfill this Public Information Act request. Similarly, the detailed methodology described in 1) or 2) might cover the information requested in 3), 4), 5), and 6).
I request that all the information be emailed to me in an electronic format (i.e., no paper copies). I also request that where an electronic document exists in a machine readable format such as an Excel spreadsheet or Word document, it be provided in that format rather than scanned in an unsearchable format such as a pdf.
If you expect to spend more than two hours fulfilling this Public Information Act request, I request a public interest fee waiver. Approximately 80% of local public school budgets in Maryland is allocated to employee compensation. MSDE statistics about that compensation is routinely published in Maryland newspapers. It is in the best interests of the public that it understands the methodology behind those statistics. I expect to report my findings in one of the Maryland-related newspapers for which I have often written, including the Washington Post, Baltimore Sun, or Education Week.
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 11:31 AM
To: ‘William Reinhard -MSDE-‘ <william.reinhard@maryland.gov>
Cc: ‘samantha.foley1@maryland.gov’ <samantha.foley1@maryland.gov>
Thank you for the USB stick with a fraction of the public information I requested. You claim in your accompanying printed letter that the “Salary information for teachers collected by MSDE is considered licensee information,” by which you presumably meant it is exempt under the Public Information Act. Please cite the specific exemption for salary data. Under Maryland law, raw salary data is public information; that is, not exempt under the Public Information Act.
I recognize that salary information is considered very politically sensitive information in Maryland. But politically sensitive does not mean secret. When I asked for salary data from my LEA, its leadership was furious and complained to Maryland General Assembly members that they shouldn’t be obliged to provide this information under the Public Information Act. General Assembly members were unresponsive to this complaint. The LEA’s leadership also sent an email to thousands of its employees, mentioning me by name and complaining that I had requested this information. But even then, the LEA’s leadership made no assertion that under Maryland law the public wasn’t entitled to see individual-level salary data.
In MSDE’s case, access to this individual-level data is especially important because of MSDE’s track record of publishing methodologically ambiguous, error prone, and unaudited salary statistical data that is widely reported as authoritative and a foundation for public deliberation over the approximately 80% of school budgets allocated to employee compensation.
Since there was no mention that you would withhold salary data until this belated response to my Public Information Act request, it is especially surprising to hear MSDE make this claim now.
If I understand your legal theory correctly, the salaries of licensed teachers would be exempt from disclosure but not the countless other LEA employees, such as custodians, long-term substitutes, coaches, cafeteria workers, and administrative secretaries, whose occupations aren’t licensed. Most county and state employees also would be exempt, as they, too, aren’t licensed.
In short, Public Information Act provision § 4-333 is not relevant to the salary disclosure question. The relevant opinion of Maryland’s Attorney General, as included in Maryland Public Information Act Manual (page I-5), is:
The term “public record” explicitly encompasses the salaries paid to public employees, including bonuses and performance awards. GP § 4-101(j)(2); Moberly v. He rboldsheimer , 276 Md. 211 (1975); Opinion of the Attorney General No. 81-034 (Nov. 23, 1981) (unpublished); 83 Opinions of the Attorney General 192 (1998).
The Public Information Act Manual (Appendix E-8) also includes this definition of a “public record”:
(2) “Public record” includes a document that lists the salary of an employee of a unit or an instrumentality of the State or of a political subdivision.
If you believe that the Maryland AG’s legal opinion is incorrect, please provide an exact citation to the legal authority on which you rely. I am copying below the entire section of the Public Information Act provision § 4-333 that you cited for your exemption claim and which makes no mention of salary data. As a matter of both common sense and legal precedent, it should be clear that disclosures appropriate for, say, licensed cosmetologists and landscape designers, would be less rigorous than those for government employees.
4-333. LICENSING RECORDS.
(a) Subject to subsections (b) through (d) of this section, a custodian shall deny inspection of the part of a public record that contains information about the licensing of an individual in an occupation or a profession.
(b) A custodian shall allow inspection of the part of a public record that gives:
(2) the business address of the licensee or, if the business address is not available, the home address of the licensee after the custodian redacts any information that identifies the location as the home address of an individual with a disability as defined in § 20-701 of the State Government Article;
(3) the business telephone number of the licensee;
(4) the educational and occupational background of the licensee;
(5) the professional qualifications of the licensee;
(6) any orders and findings that result from formal disciplinary actions; and
(7) any evidence that has been provided to the custodian to meet the requirements of a statute as to financial responsibility.
(c) A custodian may allow inspection of other information about a licensee if:
(1) the custodian finds a compelling public purpose; and
(2) the rules or regulations of the official custodian allow the inspection.
(d) Except as otherwise provided by this section or other law, a custodian shall allow inspection by the person in interest.
(e) A custodian who sells lists of licensees shall omit from the lists the name of any licensee, on written request of the licensee.
Please note, too, that in my Public Information Act request I requested all employee record data specified in MSDE’s Staff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual that wasn’t exempt under the Public Information Act. Specifically, I specified: “The data fields for confidential information should be included in the header but left blank for the individual employee data records.” In your response, you did include the header field labels. But it is hard for me to imagine that not only the salary data fields but many of the other data fields, such as those relating to FTE status, are also legally exempt. Again, if you claim otherwise, please provide the specific legal citation justifying the exemption.
It is already long past the 30-day limit specified under the Public Information Act for fulfilling my Public Information Act request. I’d welcome your prioritizing the fulfillment of my overdue Public Information Act request.
From: William Reinhard -MSDE- [mailto:william.reinhard@maryland.gov]
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 12:13 PM
Subject: Follow-up on your PIA
We’ve completed work on your most recent PIA. The data files are too large to send via email, so we’ve moved them onto a flash drive. Please let me know the best physical address to send this to.
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 3:44 PM
Please update me on your plans for fulfilling my March 29, 2017 Public Information Act request (copied below). Maryland’s Public Information Act specifies a ten-day reply period. If you don’t intend to respond to my request, it would be a courtesy and possibly save you time, too, to tell me so. Meanwhile, I will look forward to your fulfillment of my request within the thirty-day period required by law.
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 2:24 PM
To: William Reinhard -MSDE- <william.reinhard@maryland.gov>
You have not responded to my March 15, 2017 response to your March 8, 2017 response to my February 10, 2017 Public Information Act request. To hopefully speed things along, I am recasting part of my March 15, 2017 response as a separate Public Information Act request.
Under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article (SG) §§ 10-611, et seq., I request “a) the employee records, excluding confidential data, for every public employee in every LEA in Maryland State, b) the written advice from the office of Maryland’s Attorney General concerning which data fields contain confidential information, and c) the definition of salary used in the “salary” data field, which may be one of the definitions of salary you have previously provided me. The data should be provided in a single Excel file with a heading field for each data field (i.e., all the employee level data fields you collect from the LEAs, as you listed [in your March 8, 2016 email] below from the detailed manual specifying such fields). The data fields for confidential information should be included in the header but left blank for the individual employee data records. If either the headings or contents of data fields include codes, the description of those codes should be provided separately, such as on a different worksheet within the same Excel file.”
If fulfilling this Public Information Act request is expected to take more than 2 hours, then starting with a) and moving to b) and c), each item should be costed out separately in your response to me. In addition, in the unlikely event that any information cannot be provided to me in an electronic format, it should also be costed out separately.
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 5:59 PM
To: ‘William Reinhard -MSDE-‘
Subject: RE: Follow-up on your PIA Request
Thank you for your response. What follows below in indented text is my February 10, 2017 Public Information Act request, including your response on March 8, 2017 (in green) and my response to that today (in purple).
Under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article (SG) §§ 10-611, et seq., I have two follow-up document requests related to your reply to my December 16, 2016 Public Information Act request: 1) The documents related to the salary “audit” request (request #2), and 2) the LEA retention data request (request #6).
1) The audit request:
Reinhard: None.
Snider: It appears that whomever you consulted for your information may have either had incomplete information or a different definition of “audit” than I intended. By audit I meant any written information from MSDE noting that provided LEA salary data were incorrect. On page B-1 of MSDE’s “Staff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual—2016-2017,” published in June 2016, MSDE reported finding such incorrect salary data on LEA reports to MSDE: “In previous years, common errors were found to be associated with full-time equivalency, type of experience, missing subject codes for teachers, school number, budget code, position code, salary [bold added], and failure to provide separation data for staff who are no longer employed.” Please send me the supporting documents that substantiate this claim of incorrect salary data. Also, I only have a printed copy of the document I have cited. If it is available online for the public to see, please send me a link.
Reinhard: “you asked for a report on errors in salary data. We do not generate reports on errors; rather, data collection is an iterative process in this program. When errors are found, the data is corrected and updated.”
Snider: In my request I clarified that “By audit I meant any written information from MSDE noting that provided LEA salary data were incorrect.” I did not specifically limit my document request to reports. Emails about the incorrect data were also covered.
Reinhard: “you asked about the public nature of the “Staff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual.” It is designed specifically for local system staff working on the system. It is available to the public on request — we sent you a copy on November 11, 2016.”
Snider: I have correspondence from you dated November 10, 2016, not November 11, 2016. That correspondence includes a single attachment: “Minimum/Maximum/Actual Salaries and Salary Schedules—2016-2017, WDCS LEA User Manual.” It did not include a link or attachment to a document entitled: “Staff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual—2016-2017.” The document provided also did not include the text I cited. If I am missing correspondence from you dated November 11, 2016, please resend it. Otherwise, please send me an electronic copy, preferably an online link, to the requested document. My apologies in advance if I have missed some relevant correspondence that you sent me. I believe I’ve gone through all our correspondence and haven’t found a citation to that MSDE document, which I located via a non-MSDE source.
2) The LEA data request:
Reinhard: No current report exists for this information and would require several days to create. As this request is LEA specific, please make inquiry to Anne Arundel County.
Snider: Please explain why it is so difficult for MSDE to provide the machine-readable data on teacher retention/attrition that I requested. If the submitted information is no different from the data that MSDE publishes on its website and that you pointed me to, then this query is moot. But I’m looking for information that would allow me to analyze the data in a meaningful way; specifically, I am interested in teacher attrition both before and after a teacher reaches the so-called “pension cliff.” The pension cliff is the point in a teacher’s career when they are fully vested in their pension benefits. I am looking for information that would allow me to pinpoint when teachers reach the pension cliff (this requires knowing their age and years of creditable service) in relation to the year they left LEA employment. The MSDE website you pointed me to lacked this information.
If I’ve asked for the wrong set of data to analyze the pension cliff, please point me to another set of MSDE attrition data that school administrators use to analyze the impact of the pension cliff on teacher attrition. Any state or local school administrator genuinely interested in retaining teachers would need to analyze this information. Thus, I’ve assumed that MSDE’s retention data—whether it is labeled “retention data” or something else—would include this information. If my assumption is wrong about MSDE collecting this information, please let me know.
Reinhard: “it may be possible for us to provide you with the information you need for your research…. We work with the Maryland Attorney General’s office when responding to requests for database information, and their advice guides our work… Please give us a list of data fields you are interested in acquiring, and we will consider your request.”
Snider: Thank you for offering to provide me with the information I requested and for asking me to clarify which data fields I sought. Specifically, please provide me with a) the employee records, excluding confidential data, for every public employee in every LEA in Maryland State, b) the written advice from the office of Maryland’s Attorney General concerning which data fields contain confidential information, and c) the definition of salary used in the “salary” data field, which may be one of the definitions of salary you have previously provided me. The data should be provided in a single Excel file with a heading field for each data field (i.e., all the employee level data fields you collect from the LEAs, as you listed below from the detailed manual specifying such fields). The data fields for confidential information should be included in the header but left blank for the individual employee data records. If either the headings or contents of data fields include codes, the description of those codes should be provided separately, such as on a different worksheet within the same Excel file. I am thankful for your not instigating a harassment campaign in response to my request for this public salary-related information. When I’ve requested this information from local LEAs in the past, that has not always been the case.
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 1:55 PM
Subject: Follow-up on your PIA Request
We are in receipt of your February 24 request, in search of information regarding Maryland’s teacher salaries.
Your requests have targeted MSDE’s chart, “Salary Range for Ten-Month Teachers in Public Schools, 2014-15, included in the 2014-15 MSDE Fact Book. We have provided you numerous documents and information related to that chart and its related report.
Most recently, you asked for a report on errors in salary data. We do not generate reports on errors; rather, data collection is an iterative process in this program. When errors are found, the data is corrected and updated.
In addition, you have asked for retention data. We do not collect retention data, per se; rather, we collect data on teachers and their years of service which may closely reflect retention.
Finally, you asked about the public nature of the “Staff Reporting System Specifications and Procedures Manual.” It is designed specifically for local system staff working on the system. It is available to the public on request — we sent you a copy on November 11, 2016.
Your original inquiry was about the “Salary Range” chart, which is developed using the salary schedules made available by local school systems. But your interest seems to be in the actual salary data of Maryland’s public school teachers, particularly those in Anne Arundel County. MSDE collects this information for other research, and it may be of use for you to understand what the Department collects for each educator. This list was already included in the manual provided.
Local Employee Number
Generational Suffix
Most Recent Date of Employee Separation
Previous Year of Employment
Targeted Assistance School Staff FTE
Title I Qualified Paraprofessional
Some of this information (SSN, some personnel data, etc.) is confidential. Other information may also be considered confidential due to privacy concerns. We work with the Maryland Attorney General’s office when responding to requests for database information, and their advice guides our work.
That said, it may be possible for us to provide you with the information you need for your research.
Please give us a list of data fields you are interested in acquiring, and we will consider your request.
From: ‘William Reinhard -MSDE-‘
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 3:24 PM
Hello Mr. Snider-
We’ve reviewed your requests, and have no more detailed information to provide. MSDE’s data office does not collect the information that is needed for this level of analysis. Previously, we referred you to the local education agencies, which may have the detailed information you seek.
The Maryland Pension and Retirement System may be a source of information as well.
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 1:33 PM, J.H. Snider wrote:
Thank you for your past responses to my Public Information Act requests.
Please update me on your plans for fulfilling my February 10, 2017 Public Information Act request (copied below). Maryland’s Public Information Act specifies a ten-day reply period.
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 12:03 PM
Thank you for your January 11, 2017 fulfillment of my December 16, 2016 Public Information Act request.
Under the Maryland Public Information Act, State Government Article (SG) §§ 10-611, et seq.,
I have two follow-up document requests related to your reply to my December 16, 2016 Public Information Act request: 1) The documents related to the salary “audit” request (request #2), and 2) the LEA retention data request (request #6).
PreviousFixing the school board election process without also fixing the primary isn’t enough
NextThe Quest for Controversial Salary Statistics from the Anne Arundel Public Schools