ST. LOUIS — In north St. Louis city, Shawntay Vaughn worries daily about leaving work early to pick up her daughter Jenna, a student at Sumner High School.
Earlier this year, Jenna’s bus service was cut. The Saint Louis Public Schools district replaced it with a van service amid severe driver shortages — but they said it’s unreliable.
“It’s a trickle-down effect," Vaughn said. "It makes people not even want to go to school," said her daughter Jenna. “I feel like it's really unfair.”
Parents like Vaughn are feeling the impact as unreliable transportation forces them to choose between work and ensuring their kids make it to class.
"It's so chaotic with the buses either coming extremely late, 30-45 minutes late or not coming at all," said Vaughn, who lives in Penrose.
She said she wants to know where her taxpayer money is going. When asked if she thinks the transportation issues are part of a broader problem, “very much so — there's something going on," she said.
Many parents like Vaughn feel left in the dark about SLPS finances. In just one year, the district swung from a $17 million surplus to a $35 million deficit. “Let's get to the bottom of what's really going on," she said.
Current and former staff the I-Team spoke with — who do not want to be identified over fear of retaliation — largely blame bad contracts, alleging favoritism and insufficient vetting.
Records show a contract of at least $450,000 was approved for Wright Associates, led by a former colleague of ousted superintendent Keisha Scarlett.
SLPS employees tell the I-Team it was a waste with much of the work focused on breathing exercises.
Internal emails reveal SLPS financial analysts warned about missing documentation tied to other contracts. One employee wrote, "I cannot do my job... if I don’t have the documents for compliance.”
We took these concerns directly to SLPS Board Vice President Matt Davis, who said “there's a vetting process that fell through the cracks."
Davis said the board failed by not being critical enough. “The job was probably too big and the consultants were there to try to help and it was not a help," he said.
He said the current deficit was planned, allowing the district to keep investing in school programs while still having money in the bank. At the same time he said many contracts have been wasteful.
“There are safeguards that we need to put into place," he said. "A lot of those are in the policies — but the policies aren't being followed.”
For Vaughn, that means resources taken away. "Let's throw that $450,000 behind our teachers who might need a raise. Let's throw it behind upgrading the technology in our schools. I wanna know what is education gonna look like for my three year old," she said.
Former Superintendent Keisha Scarlett said she did nothing wrong and plans to fight her dismissal. Wright Associates has yet to respond to us about the serious allegations of wasting taxpayer money.
The I-Team reached out to an SLPS spokesperson for reaction to allegations of mismanagement and bad contracts. We have yet to hear back.
Davis said if you’re an SLPS parent struggling with transportation issues, you should contact your school principal. If that doesn’t work, contact SLPS Parent Liaison Gloria Nolan at Gloria.Nolan@SLPS.org or call 314-345-2485.
The I-Team requested an interview with SLPS’ former superintendent Keisha Scarlett to ask about her response to accusations that she and district leaders funneled large sums to associates through handpicked contracts, bypassing protocols meant to protect taxpayer dollars. We asked specifically about the contract with Wright Associates, led by Scarlett’s former colleague, Charles Wright — a contract SLPS employees said was wasteful and unnecessary. Her attorney declined an interview on her behalf.
In a statement released Sept. 24 through her attorney, Keisha Scarlett wrote:
“Since being chosen as the new superintendent of Saint Louis Public Schools over 18 months ago, I've had the pleasure of serving the SLPS community. I came to Saint Louis to support children who have been underserved for generations.
I take pride in the achievements my team and I reached:
1) In January 2024, we launched a first of its kind citywide literacy initiative, “Literacy for the Lou.” We made good on promised investments in libraries and books for our children. We showed our families and tax-payers that “our students, our school, our future” are worth the investment in their education.
2) We invested in our workforce and showed them that our talent is one of our greatest assets. We made huge strides in attracting and retaining needed talent and making SLPS a competitive district to choose as a workplace.
3) Through our focus on strategic communications and community engagement, we had the largest enrollment increase in decades. More families believed in the Saint Louis Public Schools “You Can Go Anywhere from Here!” initiative and chose Saint Louis Public Schools for their student’s education.
I did nothing wrong. My leadership decisions were always made to benefit our students and community. When I arrived, the administration was in crisis with significant operational problems, student service deficiencies, and staff compensation disparities. After several external studies and audits, I focused on redistributing resources to support our mission more equitably. I communicated regularly with the Board about these needed changes.
I am deeply disappointed by the City of St. Louis Board of Education’s actions. I was placed on administrative leave two months ago without any warning. The Board then conducted a secret investigation, never informing me of its scope or asking for my input. To be clear, I have never been contacted or interviewed by anyone on behalf of the Board and have not been told the reasons for their actions. Everything I know has come from media reports.
It's disappointing to see so many public misrepresentations about this situation. Both I and the dedicated professionals who uprooted their lives to serve this community have been treated unfairly. There will be a time for that discussion, but for now, I plan to challenge the Board’s decision.”