Just received word that the new director of RSU’s Bit by Bit therapeutic horseback riding program has called at least one of the horse owners who has allowed gratis use of her horses for the program in addition to being a program volunteer (and who also happens to have been one of the more vocal critics of the recent issues with Bit by Bit) and told her that her horses will no longer be needed for the  program. She’s on her way to get her horses now.

This leads to some questions:

• With the exit of trained, “old hand” mounts, how many horses are trained and ready to work with classes set to start soon?
• What does Bit by Bit view as the proper ratio of horses:students for the program?
• Was every horse lender who dared utter a word against RSU and/or has criticized the program of late told his or her horse(s) isn’t/aren’t needed?
• Is refusing a gift of horse use from generous people the best response to the situation, and for what purpose was it done?
• Is this an attempt to silence calls for greater openness and accountability from within the program by excluding critics from Bit by Bit?
• Will RSU, in fact, be changing the program to the Little by Little therapeutic stickhorse riding program?

Discuss…

UPDATE: The Claremore Progress reports that RSU has hired a new full-time therapeutic riding instructor, Elizabeth Capalbo, for the Bit by Bit program. Her credentials, like Ms. England’s, look great. But as I said with the announcement of Ms. England, the hiring of great personnel does nothing to change bad behavior of the past, and if nothing changes in the way Bit by Bit is administered by RSU execs, these great staffers will soon be facing the same frustrations and asking the same questions that led to the recent departures of Milliman, Switala, and Hart. Here’s hoping the someone, somewhere learned something. We continue to share our deep concern about those who have given so much of themselves to make Bit by Bit what is it, only to have their service and dedication discarded so shabbily. (On a side note, and this goes far beyond RSU, I have recently become somewhat concerned at the notion of doing a “nation-wide search” as a means of recruiting talent. Nothing about being from far away gives anyone more or less skill in certain areas. It simply makes them from far away. It’s not wrong to look broadly, but if it is used as a maneuver to neglect and/overlook genuine talent in your own backyard, something’s not right. And let’s not forget that when brother Joe Wiley departed RSU for greener pastures in Tennessee, the transition was too delicate to wait on a nationwide (or, heck, multicounty) search. Dr. Rice was designated very quickly. Just my opinion, which may or may not be worth exactly what you paid for it.)

[Original Post Below]

I have a wicked head cold and work is busier than busy, so I don’t have time to give many details, but I can make a few quick updates.

Megan Hart has also resigned from RSU’s Bit by Bit program. It appears she will be allowed to work out her notice (but seriously, how could she not, there’s no one left). It appears Ms. English will have a very clean slate when she arrives.

There’s been another firing resignation in another department at RSU. I’ll add more as I am able.

You Welchites, don’t forget the Welch Public Schools Enrichment Banquet tonight at 6:30. I’ll be there, head cold and all.

News on 6’s Tara Vreeland did a story on RSU’s Bit by Bit issues on tonight’s 6 p.m. broadcast. Here’s the video.

Here’s KOTV’s web story.

Your opinion?

News came yesterday that RSU has hired a new director for the Bit by Bit therapeutic equestrian program. I shared the information via Twitter and Facebook yesterday. You can read RSU’s reeducation document press release here.

First, what do I think of Jennifer England? All I know is what I have read in this press release. It appears she is a well qualified and competent person. Her years of involvement seem to indicate a sense of commitment and caring for persons with needs similar to those who so greatly benefit from Bit by Bit. I can’t argue with that.

That said, when was the last time you ever saw anyone issue a press release that said, “Please note, we have hired a complete loser.” Read me well: I am not saying England is a loser, but I am saying that if RSU, in its haste to install a new Bit by Bit director—maybe to help squelch public backlash over a blatant and idiotic administration blunder—did hire someone less than primo, do you think they’d tell you? RSU’s press release is merely its spin, designed to restore public trust in a program people know has some serious problems.

But let’s assume that Ms. England is absolutley as described, which I am sure she is, and that she is a caring, capable woman who will care deeply about the Bit by Bit program. How does that set her apart from the previous directors, all of whom have been described to me using the same words by volunteers in the program? How does that fix the issues with Bit by Bit, NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN IN REGARD THE DIRECTORS OF THE PROGRAM? It doesn’t. Period.

In short, a new Bit by Bit director does nothing to fix the problems in RSU administrative oversight and operation of the program. Further, if she is a smart and savvy professional who truly cares about the program, and nothing changes within the RSU administration, she will get frustrated, ask questions, and—most likely—be terminated like those before. I, for one, want Ms. England’s association with Bit by Bit to be more than a brief interlude before she has to file a wrongful termination lawsuit.  That means reform must occur.

And so I ask, What does reform look like? I’d like the many of you who are visiting this site to weigh in via the comments sections and tell me what you need to see from RSU to convince you to reinvest your time, talent, and treasure in the Bit by Bit program.

And let’s all be clear here. This issue is not dead. There are many volunteers and donors who are still livid over RSU’s (mis)administration of Bit by Bit. And while no one I have communicated with desires to see any Bit by Bit students harmed, they are committed to seeing Bit by Bit fixed—even if that means withdrawing themselves and their resources, including horses, until a real fix is executed. That, in the long term, will ensure that there is a Bit by Bit to serve those with special needs. In short, it’s the most caring and most responsible response. We all know Bit by Bit can exist and operate without being under the RSU umbrella. Is that what it will take? Is RSU willing to fix what is truly broken? Weigh in below.

I know many of you are very interested in this story, so I’m doing my best to keep information updated. If it’s your first visit, scroll down to the original post first. Then work your way up through the updates.

[UPDATE 5: Sept. 9, 2009 @11:52 PM]

Okay, kids, here’s the letter that started it all. This is Trista Milliman’s letter to Dr. Ray Brown asking for part-time help for the Bit by Bit program one last time and stating that if it was not forthcoming, he could consider the letter her notice. Of course, we all know she wasn’t even allowed the courtesy of serving out her two-week notice before Dr. Ray “The Terminator” Brown relieved her of her duties. Read this letter and tell me who has Bit by Bit and its students’ best interests—and safety—at heart.

[UPDATE 4: Sept. 7, 2009 @ 8:45 PM]

Sunday’s Claremore Progress carried a guest column in which RSU president Dr. Larry Rice answered none of the questions I and many others are asking, while extolling the virtues of Bit by Bit. There’s no question Bit by Bit is an excellent program, and it has become such due to the diligent efforts of under-appreciated staff, selfless volunteers, and generous benefactors. Any success has been, largely, in spite of RSU administration involvement. So then, Dr. Rice, if it’s such a great program, why are you allowing your underlings to destroy it? Or maybe a more appropriate question, who is really in charge on College Hill?

[UPDATE 3: Sept. 4, 2009 @ 3:51 PM]

Several of things have happened today. I am still receiving communiques from Bit by Bit volunteers who have had it with RSU’s management of the program. If all of them are contacting the university, they are a force to be reckoned with.

Second, Brent Ortolani, director of public relations at RSU, actually replied to my email. In my email I asked:

Does the university have any comment on the termination of Trista Milliman as interim director of the Bit by Bit program Monday? Has the university located a new director yet? What is the university’s response to news of a Bit by Bit volunteer backlash over Milliman’s termination? What steps is [sic] the university taking to cover all the Bit by Bit classes starting Sept. 15 with such a small paid staff and volunteers pulling out? What are the current Bit by Bit enrollment and staffing numbers?

He responded by sending me a Microsoft Word document attached to an email, which I have converted to PDF for you. Here it is.

In short, he uses the typical we-don’t-reply-on-personnel-issues catch all to avoid that question. He also provides the typical we’ve-got-everything-under-control response. Interestingly enough, he did not mention postponing classes as a possibility, as Dr. Brown did in my previous update (see below). Probably the most telling of Ortolani’s response, though, is the question he did not answer, specifically: “What is the university’s response to news of a Bit by Bit volunteer backlash over Milliman’s termination?” His non-answer indicates the university seems to expect that program volunteers will eventually shut up and toe the line. He states, “The university anticipates a similar number of volunteers this year,” the number of which he earlier fixed at approximately 75. The information I am receiving makes it appear that that would be highly unlikely given the current circumstances. What say you?

Lastly, the lawsuit by former Bit by Bit director Jana Walstrom has not been settled. More info on that will show up as a new post here.

**************************

[UPDATE 2: Sept. 4, 2009 @9:55 AM]

I have permission to share a reply Dr. Ray Brown made to an email inquiry.

Thank you for your email regarding the Bit by Bit program. The university began the Bit by Bit program approximately 11 years ago and has served children/clients continuously since then. A lot of great things have happened at Bit by Bit over the years. Many students have shown remarkable progress. I want to reassure you that the program will continue in spite of temporary setbacks. The search for the director position is drawing to a close. Interviews are currently underway and the director should be hired very soon. A search has started for a full-time instructor. We fully intend to have Bit by Bit staffed with certified and experienced instructors. We have several NARHA certified instructors who have applied to the Bit by Bit program. In the event that sufficient qualified instructors are not employed, the university will delay the start of classes. At this time, I do not believe that will be necessary. The resignation of the Interim Director was unfortunate and poorly timed. Nevertheless, the university is committed to continuing the same high quality program that has been offered for the last decade. Thank you for expressing your concern and giving me an opportunity to explain our plans.
Ray Brown

Some observations and questions:

1. Milliman made the university aware she would resign IF more staff wasn’t hired. If, as Dr. Brown states, they are close to filling these positions, Milliman would not have needed to resign.
2. As it has been reported, Milliman did not resign. She submitted her letter last week asking again for more staff (and stating she would resign if they denied her request), and Brown terminated her this Monday.
3. As for the timing, all accounts lay that squarely in the university’s lap, specifically that of Dr. Ray Brown.
4. What does the university consider “sufficient qualified instructors”? The underlying issue here is requiring too much of too few. I am calling for RSU to define and state for public judgment what it considers the criteria for a “qualified instructor” and what it means by “sufficient,” and how it reached that determination. Bottom line, share with the world what RSU considers a safe and proper ratio of students to “qualified instructors.”

**************************

[UPDATE 1: Sept. 3, 2009 @ 7: 11 PM]

The Claremore Progress today covered this very issue. You can see its report here.

**************************

[ORIGINAL POST BELOW]

For some time now, the WynnBlog has received occasional inquiries regarding the Bit by Bit therapeutic equine program that runs under the auspices of Rogers State University. As the resident RSU critic and watchdog (see previous reports here), people come to me. I’ve never really had any information about the program and its travails. Until this week.

Bit by Bit is an program for young people with developmental challenges. According to the Bit by Bit page on RSU’s website:

The documented benefits of therapeutic horseback riding are great. They can be seen in the following:

• speech
• movement
• balance
• strength
• emotional health
• motivation

Therapeutic horseback riding is a growing resource for health, behavioral and educational specialists.

Students who have lost the ability to move in a three-dimensional way, make great progress through the experience of riding and reintegrating the use of:

• muscles
• mental processing
• motor planning and strength
• moving closer to independent living goals

Students termed “at risk” benefit from the emotional bond of handling the horse, performing tasks of responsible care-giving as well as the accomplishment of horsemanship skills, that carry over to the home, family relationships, self-esteem and school activities.

Bit by Bit has been the site of first time speech motivated by the desire to communicate with the horse and we often hear reports of lessened falling due to improved balance.

The Bit by Bit program has been a huge success. Operating for over a decade, the program has grown to serve approximately 90 young persons. Its success is due to lots of caring volunteers who give freely of their time, energy, money, and livestock. Dr. Ray Brown, the RSU exec immediately responsible for Bit by Bit, acknowledged as much in a letter following the departure of Bit by Bit director Velinda Baker, writing, in part:

“Our volunteers are critical to the successful operation of the Bit by Bit program…. Your support is invaluable…. We are dedicated to having the best possible therapeutic riding program and we could not accomplish that goal without your help.”

It seems RSU may, then, have trouble accomplishing the goal of beginning Bit by Bit classes on schedule September 15.

Monday, interim director of Bit by Bit, Trista Milliman, was terminated by Dr. Brown. This following a letter she sent last week asking for more part time instructors to be hired to serve the student load, which has nearly doubled while the number of paid staff positions has remained unchanged (with some unfilled at times) thus making a net reduction in the ratio of trained instructors to students, which some within the program have considered a safety concern. Brown, who draws a salary of nearly $11,000 per month as RSU’s Vice President for Economic and Community Development, reportedly balked at the notion of hiring more part-time instructors at $13 per hour for three nights a week. Milliman’s letter further stated that if the university again refused to approve additional help for upcoming classes, RSU could consider the letter her two-weeks’ notice. Not content to let Milliman to serve out the notice, Dr. Brown fired her Monday, after which she was—all together now—escorted to her car. The RSU pattern has changed little.

Problematic as Milliman’s termination just two weeks before classes is, it’s just the most recent trouble for the Bit by Bit program. Previous Bit by Bit director, Jana Walstom, sued RSU for wrongful termination on August 21, 2008. As part of her petition, Walstrom alleged, among other things, that, after she questioned what she suspected was misappropriation of certain funds, she was terminated. Specifically, Walstrom alleges she contacted Dr. Larry Minks because $6,500.00 of funds budgeted for the Bit by Bit program were spent by another non-Bit by Bit-related department. She also alleged she signed a statement that she was resigning under duress after being threatened by RSU administrators that she would not be paid for her services if she did not. And there was, of course, a confidentiality agreement as well (read my previous post here). The suit was removed from Rogers County District Court to federal court and I haven’t been following its progress. I was recently told it was settled out of court. When I have time I’ll check. If it was settled, who’ll give me odds it contained a confidentiality agreement?

I have been told the Bit by Bit program is supported in large part by grants, and I am working to learn just how the program’s finances work. But I have been told that, as Walstrom claimed in her lawsuit, there appears to be some disconnect between grant funds received and actual purchases made for the program. I have no way to know yet whether those claims are true, but I will be researching it. If I were a grantor to the program, I would certainly request documentation from the university proving granted funds had been used in accordance with the grant proposal, but grantors should do that as a matter of course.

I said above that RSU may have problems beginning Bit by Bit classes September 15. Why? Bit by Bit is a program dependent on volunteers, and the volunteers are not happy. Thus, Bit by Bit may lack the manpower and resources to serve the special needs students who so desperately need it.  Bit by Bit volunteers have united behind Milliman and are vocally challenging Brown’s termination of her. Milliman was a Bit by Bit volunteer from late 2007. She is certified by the North American Riding for the Handicapped Association (NARHA), and she was asked to serve as interim director when Velinda Baker departed. Baker was made director after Walstrom’s resignation/termination, and Walstrom had taken over from Linda Baron, who began the program on RSU’s campus, departed. Milliman is regarded by many volunteers to be a superbly professional and competent director who works hard, sometimes from 7 AM to 9 PM, to make sure the kids of Bit by Bit are served. RSU’s recent actions have caused the volunteers to band together to to seek an accounting of the entire program, some demanding the program be removed from under the auspices of RSU altogether.

What bargaining chip do the volunteers have? Themselves. Brown has acknowledged that volunteers are critical to Bit by Bit’s success. If they unite and refuse en masse to provide their services (and refuse the use of their horses, as some have), the program has very little chance of success, and kids who really need to be served will not be. I have been sharply critical of RSU’s actions in the past. I believe the repeated litigation with similar details, not to mention the U.S. Department of Education’s scathing report on RSU’s federal grant programs, indicate there are serious issues on College Hill. I had the highest of hopes that President Rice, who many have told me is a good and decent man, would seek to get to the bottom of these issues. Truthfully, I have been underwhelmed by his pursuit of reform. If there ever was a time for him to step in and rein back his underlings, it is now. Very many special young students will be harmed in a way terminated employees never could be if RSU does not reverse course, adequately staff Bit by Bit, and provide open and transparent accounting of the entire program. And some apologies are in order, too. I wish I could be hopeful, but if the past is truly an indication of the future, I won’t hold my breath.

Oh, and what does the university have to say about all this? Apparently nothing. I emailed RSU’s head of communications, Brent Ortolani, today asking some questions about the situation and for RSU’s statement. Though I received an email read receipt stating Brent Ortolani read my email at 09:56:54 this morning, he has not responded, which is not surprising, as he never replies to my inquiries. My email to Ortolani was CC:ed to President Rice. I have received no reply from him either.

You are welcome to comment here, but if you want to see things change, you should contact the university. I’ll make it easy for you:

Rogers State University
1701 W. Will Rogers Blvd.
Claremore, OK 74017
800-256-7511
918-341-7510

Dr. Larry Rice, President of RSU
lrice@rsu.edu
(918) 343-7613

Dr. Ray Brown, Vice President for Economic and Community Development
rbrown@rsu.edu
(918) 343-7622

Oh, and if you call the president’s office and Sharon Kern answers, tell her her old pal Tyson Wynn says hi!

Gripado’s (click on “Blog” to see their menu) has long been on my list of Claremore Best Bets. I love the place, but I tend to forget they are there (and I will stop that right now). After trying to eat a late supper at a couple places tonight, unsuccessfully since one closed at 8 PM and the other at 7:30, we happened by Gripado’s, thrilled to find it open late. 

Tonight’s meal didn’t fail to impress, and I can heartily recommend the Italian bruschetta (the distinction is necessary, as they also serve the Greek variety) and the chicken parmesan. Jeane had the ham, peas, and bowtie pasta, which I have previously enjoyed. 

Adding to the ambiance tonight was a young keyboardist—Michael Womack—who played tasteful and appropriate music. It all added up to a great experience. We highly recommend them. And, since they also do double duty as a donut shop, you buy tomorrow’s breakfast tonight. 

We even did a live report from the scene. You can hear the piano in the background.

KOCO reports that Tywone Parks has been sentenced to ten years in prison for plotting a shooting spree at Rogers State University in Claremore, Okla.

You may recall that the WynnBlog was instrumental in breaking news of the incident when it occurred. (Click here to see all WynnBlog posts in the Tywone Parks category.) Court records show that Parks pleaded no contest to the charges. Though KOCO reports he was sentenced to ten years in prison, Oklahoma State Courts Network data shows Parks’ sentencing was postponed from today (May 21, 2009) to June 11, 2009. Not sure why the discrepancy. I’ll keep my ear to the ground.

Previously in this space, I have shared that I have been in a dialogue with Bailey Dabney, publisher of the Claremore Progress, regarding Claremore’s tea party last week and the Progress‘ coverage of it. What I did not share was that Mr. Dabney was gracious enough to invite me to respond on the pages of his paper as a guest columnist, rather than in a letter to the editor. He certainly did not have to do so. And when he received my column, he didn’t have to print it, but he did. You’ll find it on the Op-Ed page of today’s (April 21, 2009) Progress and also online here.

Since my reports on the Claremore tea party and subsequent responses to the Claremore Progress‘ coverage of it, I have had occasion to be in communication with Bailey Dabney, the still relatively new publisher of the paper. I won’t be sharing many of the details of our dialogue, other than to saw it has been cordial, fair, and friendly. I find him a reasonable man. I am also impressed with his level coverage of what he say when he was in attendance at the Oklahoma City tea party. It’s as if he actually got out of his car and walked among those about which he intended to report.

The Tea Party crowd was friendly and lively, with an interesting array of witty and creative signs expressing dissatisfaction with our current national fiscal policies. As an eyewitness to this sizable gathering, I was surprised the way these groups have been portrayed by national media. There was no anti-government, anti-American, or anti-establishment attitude, as one cable news network described them. Taxpayers did want to be heard regarding their distaste for the current fiscal strategy. The tone was civil and friendly as I walked through snapping pictures with my Blackberry. Watching this group actually made me proud to live in a country where this type of civil communication is allowed. I haven’t seen official estimates, but my unofficial estimate puts 5,000 or more American patriots in attendance as our group walked through. By my estimation, this is an example for other protestors to follow.

That’s strikingly different from the report provided by his underlings in regard to Claremore’s event. It’s nice to see a reasoned head at the helm, and I am hopeful that he continues to improve the paper’s reporting and editorial pieces. His staffers should take a page from his book (or should that be paper?).

This is a good sign. I’ve been critical of the Progress many times, but I have to give credit where credit is due. At this rate, they may get me back as a subscriber.

[UPDATE—April 17, 2009 at 1:30 p.m.]

In response to my (and others’) claims that the Claremore Progress’ audio report posted on their site was inaccurate (see original post below), whoever Twitters for the paper as WillRogersPaper just tweeted this:

Some RC folks upset as being characterized as being “angry” while at TEA Party and not in street. Todays Progress

And as proof that participants were demonstrating in the intersection, they offer a link to this twitpic (click for big):

Let’s do a little analysis, shall we? What you see here are not tea party demonstrators protesting in an intersection, though the Progress intends you to think that. You see one man (”Born Free – Taxed to Death”) standing off the curb, though not being a hindrance to traffic, holding his sign. The rest of the people in this picture, which the Progress obviously intends you to interpret as protesters in an intersection, are actually crossing the street at the designated point (i.e., the crosswalk). You see a couple young men transporting signs (obviously not waving them) crossing from east to west, and another group, appearing to be mostly women, crossing from west to east. Notice they all have a raised foot, caught by the camera in the action of walking across the street, at the legal place to do so (presumably after receiving the illuminated “Walk” indication). The woman in the red hoodie holding up her sign is on the sidewalk (notice her height). All in all, a weak attempt to substantiate a fabrication with a misleading picture. Seems the Progress continues to ratify everything people have been saying.

This goes perfectly to my previous point. One can report what actually happened, or because of bias, agenda, or just sloppy journalism, they can report what they want and offer up a clearly mischaracterized picture  as support.

I reassert my previous points: protesters were not demonstrating in the intersection, the demonstrators were certainly not a disturbance to traffic, they were not angry, raving maniacs. It was an orderly demonstration by patriotic Americans, which–judging by the public response as it happened–has significant support. Guess it’s too much to ask that the Claremore Progress get it right, or at least correct the record when they are shown to be wrong.

Oh, and just one question for Progress reporter Krystal Carman, who received photo credit for previous Progress pictures and presumably this one: “Did you cross the street, and if so, where? If you were photographed doing so, would it be fair to accuse you of practicing the craft of alleged journalism (or photography) in the intersection?” Didn’t think so.

[End of Update]

[Original Post]

I was on the scene at yesterday’s Claremore tea party. Loyal readers will recall I provided audio reports from the scene throughout the morning demonstration. I did this using a nifty little program called AudioBoo. Lo and behold, today I see that the Claremore Progress has updated its report about the tea party by uploading an audio report using AudioBoo. I wonder where they got that idea? I don’t mind being a trendsetter. But, the Progress is missing the point. The beauty of technology is that it allows one (in this case, me) to do reports from the scene of the action as it happens. It’s a waste of the technology to use it as the Progress has.

What did they do? Well, according to the Progress website:

Progress Managing Editor Randy Cowling and Staff Writer Krystal Carman talk about the event.

Click the play button below to listen to their commentary.

What a joke! Were these people even at the same event I was? Aside from seemingly missing the metaphorical meaning of a tea party, they seem to be awfully concerned with the distraction to traffic. I was at the 11 a.m. event the entire time, and I never once saw anyone in any intersection. There were ROCO sheriff’s deputies on scene who I witnessed showing demonstrators where they could and could not stand (from the sidewalk out). If there were ever anyone in an intersection, the deputies would no doubt have dealt with it. Demonstrators were lining the streets at intersections, but that is not being in an intersection, and they were certainly not a distraction to traffic. In fact, if you listen to my reports from the scene, you will hear lots of honks of support from the allegedly distracted passersby.

Further, I spoke with several people there, and no one was emotionally angry. Sure, people are passionate about where they stand. But it was no hateful crowd ranting and raving. It was a very collegial and good-spirited gathering. Again, if these were raving lunatics, you could have heard that in my reports. Judge for yourself. It’s also shocking to hear the surprise in their voices as they share that the public is allowed to exercise their First Amendment rights without a permit. Maybe the Progress should be required to get a permit to exercise theirs.

And finally, I would challenge the numbers quoted. There were far more than 50 at the 11 a.m. event, and if they’re off by that much once, how many other things are being slanted by this rag? I’ve alleged the Progress‘ bias for a long time, and these two hacks have proved my point. For too long, certain papers (which are rapidly dying) have reported the news after the fact and after it has passed through a less-than-objective filter. And in print, they can use certain verbiage that makes them seem fair. Audio is another thing. You can hear the bias in the Progress‘ audio report. Just give a listen and judge for yourself.