Board hears two search-firm pitches, delays selection while asking about cost, outreach and timeline

The Spooner Area School District board heard pitches from two superintendent-search consultants and agreed not to make a selection at the meeting, instead asking both firms to answer follow-up questions about outreach, screening and fees.

At the outset, Chair (speaker 1) said the board had a quorum but that several members were absent and no firm selection would be made that night. Cheryl Gullichrude, representing the Wisconsin Association of School Boards, described a multi-stage search process that emphasizes stakeholder input — focus groups and an online community survey — and a posting and interview timeline that could lead to candidate interviews in January and a hire by February. “As your member association, we’ve done searches for many, many years,” Gullichrude said. She told the board that WSB provides application packets, interview-question resources, salary comparables and a two-year retention guarantee.

Gullichrude also said district board members would see every application rather than receiving a WSB short list. She described WSB’s outreach as rooted in state networks — CESAs, the Wisconsin School Leadership Center and an internal applicant database — while noting that broader national advertising or extra marketing could be added for an additional fee.

Board members pressed Gullichrude on cost. She said the firm’s proposal listed a conservative not-to-exceed figure (the transcript records the phrasing as “not to exceed twelfth, 7” in the packet) and emphasized that districts are billed for actual time and expenses rather than the maximum. Gullichrude said many searches come in under her original estimates.

Later in the meeting the board connected with a second presenter, Dr. Bruce Miles of Big River. Miles described a filtering approach that uses a set of emailed short-answer questions to candidates and resume score sheets as an early screen, followed by interviews for a narrowed finalist pool. “I send out a list of 8 to 10 email questions that the court approves and tell people that they’re in 1 or 2 behind,” Miles said, describing the firm’s approach to identifying candidates who match district goals. He recommended limiting finalists to three or four to avoid board fatigue and urged careful employer reference checks for finalists.

Miles and board members discussed cost and advertising. Miles referenced an additional roughly $500 for travel or expanded posting in out-of-state outlets; during the Q&A the board calculated an example total of $10,050 when adding a $500 posting/travel estimate to the base figure discussed. Miles said districts typically cover posting costs and that his firm can work with boards on budget choices.

Both firms described post-hire supports — evaluation frameworks and onboarding assistance — and both presenters thanked the board for the opportunity. Chair said the board would review proposals, gather any remaining input, and follow up; no vote or formal decision was taken at the meeting.

What’s next: The board agreed to tag further discussion about selecting a search firm onto an upcoming regular meeting to encourage higher attendance and to set a board planning meeting as part of the search timeline. The presenters will provide materials and the board will continue deliberations before any contract is awarded.