Written by: JR Robinson

An investigation into Natalie McKinney, a Memphis Shelby County Schools (MSCS) board member, reveals concerning financial practices and potential conflicts of interest that cast doubt on her qualifications to critique the MSCS superintendent.

Financial Irregularities at Whole Child Strategies

Whole Child Strategies, the 501(c)(3) non-profit run by McKinney, shows troubling financial patterns:

• In 2022, McKinney paid herself $204,706 out of the organization's $596,933 revenue.
• That same year, $529,560 (88.7% of revenue) went to salaries and compensation.
• Only $156,500 was distributed as grants, with $156,000 going to a single entity, Cathedral of Faith.

In 2021, despite higher revenue of $1,349,850, the organization maintained similar compensation practices:

• $835,027 (61.9% of revenue) went to salaries and compensation.
• McKinney again received $204,706 in compensation.

These figures raise questions about the efficient use of funds and the prioritization of community impact over personal gain.

Attempts to Secure MSCS Contracts

Emails from 2023 reveal McKinney's efforts to secure contracts with MSCS before becoming a board member:

• McKinney proposed a $76,750 "strategic relationship-building" project for the Manassas High School Community School Zone.
• The proposal included vague deliverables like "asset mapping" and "needs assessment".
• MSCS officials expressed reservations, with one stating, "it was found that her organization lacked capacity and all proposals were not reasonable".

Superintendent's Concerns

MSCS Superintendent Tutonial Williams raised alarms about McKinney's motives in an email to board members:

"I wanted you to have perspective when she continues to speak with you or provide ultimatums of her true agenda".

Williams noted that McKinney had previously sought financial support from MSCS due to "non-renewed philanthropic funding with her non-profit".

Questionable Qualifications

Given the financial practices at Whole Child Strategies and the failed attempts to secure MSCS contracts, McKinney's qualifications to critique the superintendent's performance are dubious at best. Her actions suggest a pattern of self-interest that may be influencing her position on the board.

This investigation raises serious concerns about McKinney's ability to act impartially in her role as an MSCS board member and calls into question the true motivations behind her criticism of the superintendent.