On December 17, I entered into a contract with EVO Accounting & Financial Services as a subcontractor to provide monitoring services for the Detroit Public Schools District, Title I/Section 31a After School and Supplemental Educational Services Programs. The program was operational until February 10, when I received an email stating that the Executive Director of the Title I Office wanted to meet with my company. At which time I was informed on a conference call, that another company has been included to provide monitoring services as well. When I begin to rebuttal this and submitted a letter in writing to the Executive Director of my concerns, the monitoring services was suspended.
After, what was suppose to be a temporary suspension to the monitoring program, was actually a leverage used to underhand my monitoring proposal and to actually use the other company to perform the monitoring services. After the monitoring services was suspended for three weeks, I was told that the contract was being revised between EVO & DPS, and there would be additional delay in the monitoring services being able to continue the services (which was not true).
On March 8, I received an email copy of the revised contract from EVO, which had reduced the original contract amount of $117,000 to $75,000 (a decrease of $42,000) minus the payments of $52,666, which would reduce the available balance to $22,334 for operational expenses over the next 3 months.
A few days later, I meet with Mr. Vince Jackson, President of EVO, and Mr. James Humphries, Executive Director of DPS, Title I Department. I tried to reason with the two and was given no consideration and only told this was the final decision. (in other words take it or leave it). I was told I had to decrease my staff of sixteen down to four people, but wanted me to train the other company staff of five, that would replace my employees.
I was not in agreement with this revised contract and wanted to get legal advise before I proceed. I contacted an attorney that reviewed the revised contract, and advised me not to sign, because it would give me no financial options. I received an email from EVO on March 15, that stated I had until March 18 to sign the revised contract or my services would no longer be needed.
I tried to fairly negotiate with EVO in consideration of the revised contract amount, but no consideration was given. On March 29, I received a letter from EVO, which stated "Your decision to decline signing the revised monitoring contract acted as termination of the original contract, you are no longer a party to the contract agreement between EVO and DPS".
I continue to submit invoices to EVO for payment according to the orginal contract terms, but was refused payments. EVO continue to submit 30 day invoices to Detroit Public Schools for monitoring services, and was paid. EVO submitted invoices for payment when there was no monitoring activity provided for the months of suspension.
The Executive Director of the DPS, Title I Department is being investigated for fradulent and misappropriation of funds, and has since been suspended, but EVO continues to submit invoices to the Detroit Public School, for monitoring services, and has been paid more than $350,000, which recently as of October 1 submitted an invoice for monitoring services in the amount of $74,000, but refused to settlement.
I attempted to submit my monitoring services proposal directly to the Detroit Public Schools District to provide services for this 2006 school year, but was denied any response to my proposal. I have also contacted the Detroit News, Fox 2, and the State of Michigan, to air my story and hopefully get some results.
0 comments