(The Center Square) – Wisconsin’s Department of Public Instruction spent about $8 million on resetting its standards on the Forward Exam, according to new records released by DPI.

The records came after Dairyland Sentinel asked the Department of Justice last Tuesday to intervene on its public records requests. The DOJ sent a letter to both DPI and Dairyland Sentinel but also stated that it would have to defend DPI in the case of a public records lawsuit.

The records appeared to be one year of the expenses of what has been reported to be a 10-year, $80 million contract between DPI and Data Recognition Corp. to operate the Forward Exam and help desk.

The Center Square was unable to obtain clarity from DPI on if the $8 million was part of that contract, an amended contract or separate from the 2016 contract.

“The DPI holds a massive contract with DRC to manage the Forward Exam,” Dairyland Sentinel Publisher Brian Fraley told The Center Square. “However, the Department cannot use a private vendor to shield itself from public records requests, nor can they use that vendor to prevent citizens from seeing the inner workings of public meetings that altered state education policy.”

DPI also sent Dairyland Sentinel the $396,0000 in expenses from its workshop in the Wisconsin Dells, a document it previously shared with only a select group of reporters that did not include The Center Square, despite requests for that information.

The conference was used to change standards on the Forward Exam.

Dairyland Sentinel still believes there are minutes and recordings from the conference that should be public records that DPI has not released related to its workshop, conducted by Data Recognition Corp. It plans to continue to fight for those records.

The Institute for Reforming Government has called for Wisconsin lawmakers to create a special committee to investigate the workshop and whether it should constitute a public meeting.

Jake Curtis, General Counsel and Director of the CIO at IRG, previously told The Center Square that he believed the 88-member standards-setting group filled with school employees and leaders fits the exact definition of an Ad Hoc Committee and that meetings of that committee should be public and not subject to the non-disclosure agreements signed by conference attendees.

Conference attendees were asked to sign non-disclosure agreements to hide discussions that occurred at the workshop.