This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
Gaskin and Associates Consulting Group, LLC
NNPS proposal
October 8 2026
7
Governance safeguards and review
NNPS would retain the decision authority. The lead consultant would coordinate the advisory work
and evidence record. Authorized district staff would validate operating facts; appropriately qualified
reviewers would test financial avoidability, transportation, instructional readiness and facilities
assumptions.
Material risk
Proposed response
Incomplete or conflicting records
Maintain a dated conflict log; seek custodian reconciliation; identify which
conclusions change if an input remains unresolved.
Overlap with existing contracts
Match tasks to the executed WXY and routing scopes and amendments
before purchasing incremental work; document any verified scope credit.
Aggregate fit mistaken for
feasibility
Require grade-level rooms, qualified staff, required service hours, tested
duties and receiving-pupil impacts before endorsing an alternative.
Savings treated as available
funding
Separate avoided funded costs from redeployment and continuing
commitments; obtain prices and funding approval before implementation.
Access loss or transition
disruption
Assess affected and receiving pupils, family transportation, program
access and continuity; price phase-in and fallback arrangements.
Schedule or resource shortfall
Confirm the resource plan and prerequisites; report delays and revise
milestones with written approval.
Student and personnel information
NNPS would approve access, authorized users, handling and retention before providing identifiable
records. Analysis would use only the information needed for the agreed task. Public outputs would
use aggregated or de-identified results and exclude student identities, family contacts and
unnecessary personnel details. NNPS counsel and data custodians would approve disclosure and
transfer arrangements.
Quality and independence
The review would retain source locators, units, dates and calculation rules, distinguish facts from
assumptions, and record specialist disagreements. Findings would not be conditioned on choosing a
closure or producing a particular savings figure. The evidence baseline applies selected GAO
principles but is not a GAGAS engagement and provides no assurance, certification or GAO
endorsement. [S79]Jump to an indexed page (48 of 48)