Memphis-Shelby County Schools did not need another political fight. It needed stable leadership, transparent governance, safe schools, accountable adults, and an unwavering focus on children.

Instead, the public witnessed the removal of Superintendent Dr. Marie Feagins less than 10 months into her tenure—a decision that deepened distrust in a school system already struggling to earn the confidence of parents, educators, students, and taxpayers. The school board voted 6–3 on January 21, 2025, to terminate Feagins’ contract, citing professional-misconduct and leadership allegations that Feagins vigorously denied. She characterized the effort as driven by false accusations and political maneuvering. Read Chalkbeat’s reporting.

Now, a central civic question demands a public answer: How can Stand for Children Tennessee present itself as an independent champion for parents and students while its executive director, Cardell Orrin, appears to have been drawn into the political and communications effort surrounding Feagins’ removal?

This is not a question about whether nonprofit leaders should care about public education. They should. It is not a question about whether advocacy organizations should speak out. They must. It is a question of independence, disclosure, influence, accountability, and whose interests are ultimately being served.

The conflict at the center

Cardell Orrin is executive director of Stand for Children Tennessee, a nonprofit that says it advocates for public investments in education, affordable housing, youth development, public transit, infrastructure, and health care. Orrin’s own organization identifies him as its executive director and describes longstanding involvement in Memphis education and civic work. Stand for Children Tennessee and Orrin’s organization profile.

But the information reported in the records described by JustMy places a nonprofit leader with substantial education-policy influence in the orbit of the campaign to remove a sitting superintendent.

According to the emails referenced in JustMy’s reporting, on January 14, 2025—the same day the school board considered actions related to Feagins’ employment—board member Stephanie Malone wrote that she had included “Cardell Orrin who is on my team.” That phrase alone calls for clarification. What team? What role? What authority? Was Orrin acting as a private citizen, an education advocate, a political strategist, a nonprofit executive, a charter-school board chair, or some combination of those roles?

The records also reportedly show that Hiltzik Strategies, a New York public-relations firm, sent Orrin edits to a statement associated with school board member Natalie McKinney and discussed providing an embargoed version to a “friendly reporter” before a meeting.

If those communications are authentic and complete, the public deserves to know why a nonprofit executive was involved in messaging connected to a vote that would determine the future of Tennessee’s largest school district. A nonprofit leader helping to shape a board member’s public statement is not the same thing as a parent speaking during public comment. It raises legitimate questions about whether public-school governance was being managed through a political communications operation rather than through transparent deliberation before the community.

That does not, by itself, establish wrongdoing by Orrin, Stand for Children Tennessee, the board members, or the communications firm. But it does establish the need for clear answers—and for disclosure sufficient for Memphis families to judge whether the lines between advocacy, political influence, charter-school leadership, and public-school governance were properly drawn.

Feagins’ firing and its aftermath

The termination of Dr. Feagins was not a routine personnel matter. It was a destabilizing event in a district with a long history of superintendent turnover, fractured board relationships, and community frustration.

The board’s stated rationale involved allegations concerning overtime claims, a donation accepted without board approval, and statements tied to a federal grant deadline. The board released a 209-page special-counsel report, while Feagins rejected the claims and argued that she was being targeted through false accusations and political maneuvering. Read the reporting.

Those competing narratives matter. They also make transparency more important, not less.

When a superintendent says she was removed for challenging entrenched practices, and when civic leaders say the firing was necessary because of leadership failures, the community should not be asked to simply choose a side. It should demand records, sworn testimony where appropriate, independent review, clear timelines, and direct answers from every person or organization with influence over the outcome.

The question for Stand for Children Tennessee is especially urgent because the organization’s public identity is built around children, families, opportunity, and equity. If an advocacy organization acts behind the scenes in a leadership fight, it must explain how that involvement advanced its mission—and why it was conducted in a way that did not compromise public trust.

Questions requiring public answers

• Whether Cardell Orrin participated in planning, messaging, lobbying, or strategy related to Dr. Feagins’ termination.
• Whether Orrin acted on behalf of Stand for Children Tennessee, himself personally, any political network, or another organization.
• Whether Stand for Children Tennessee’s board authorized, reviewed, or knew about his involvement.
• Whether the organization disclosed conflicts arising from Orrin’s education-sector leadership roles.
• Whether Stand for Children Tennessee had financial, strategic, political, or governance interests affected by the leadership change.
• Whether communications with school board members, consultants, or media representatives complied with the organization’s ethics and disclosure standards.
• Whether the group still supports the termination and, if so, what measurable student-centered outcomes it believes justify that support.

These are not partisan questions. They are public-interest questions.

The results cannot be ignored

Memphis families deserve honesty about the district’s academic reality: there has been measurable growth, but the scale of the need remains enormous.

MSCS reported gains in its 2025 TCAP results. Across grades 3–12, English language arts proficiency rose from 23.7% in 2024 to 24.6% in 2025. Math performance improved across several grade bands, including an increase from 14.8% to 17.3% among high-school students meeting expectations. View MSCS 2025 TCAP results.

The 2025–26 results also showed improvement. In grades 3–8, 23.7% of students met or exceeded expectations in English language arts, 22.6% in math, 26.6% in science, and 26.4% in social studies. View the TCAP data.

Those gains should be recognized. Children and teachers who are making progress deserve that recognition.

But progress cannot become a public-relations shield for the underlying crisis. When fewer than one in four elementary and middle-grade students meet or exceed expectations in core subjects, Memphis cannot afford governance driven by insider rivalries, personal alliances, political payback, or carefully managed media narratives.

The graduation rate rose to 84.4% for the Class of 2025, while Tennessee’s statewide rate was 92.3%. Graduation matters. But the question families must ask is whether students are leaving school prepared—not merely credentialed—for college, careers, civic life, and economic mobility. MSCS graduation-rate announcement.

MSCS also reported improvement in its Ready Graduate measure, rising from 36.6% to 47.6% for the cohort reflected in the 2024–25 State Report Card. Yet even that improvement means that more than half of the students in that cohort were not classified as ready graduates under the state’s benchmark. MSCS State Report Card summary.

Not who controls the narrative.

Not who gets the press strategy.

Not who has access to which board member.

Not who can call a reporter “friendly.”

A climate of fear and silence

The concerns extend beyond test scores and superintendent politics.

Families and employees have repeatedly raised concerns about whether the system responds adequately when people report wrongdoing, mistreatment, safety issues, or administrative misconduct. The district maintains a confidential ethics-and-fraud reporting system for employees and others to report ethical violations, fraud, misuse of district property, and related concerns. MSCS Ethics and Fraud Reporting.

A reporting portal is important. But a portal is not accountability.

Employees must believe that reporting fraud, abuse, misconduct, retaliation, manipulation, or safety failures will result in an impartial investigation—not career damage, isolation, reassignment, intimidation, or silence. Parents must believe that when they report harm, the school system will act swiftly and transparently. Students must know adults will protect them even when doing so is inconvenient for powerful people.

Recent litigation and reporting involving alleged abuse at Winchester Elementary illustrates the stakes. Parents sued MSCS and school officials after a former teacher was convicted in connection with sexual abuse allegations; the lawsuit alleged that the abuse continued after concerns were raised and challenged whether the district and school acted appropriately. These are allegations in civil litigation, not findings against every defendant, but they underscore why independent accountability and credible reporting channels matter. Read the Local Memphis report.

A healthy public-school system cannot operate through fear. It cannot punish the messenger while protecting the institution. And it cannot claim to center children while dismissing the voices of educators, parents, students, and whistleblowers who raise difficult questions.

The cost to Memphis

The damage caused by continuing chaos inside MSCS does not stop at the schoolhouse door.

It reaches into neighborhoods, local employers, colleges, workforce pipelines, property values, public safety, family stability, and Memphis’ ability to compete for talent and investment. Every superintendent removal, leadership scandal, board feud, confidentiality dispute, and unanswered allegation tells families that their children’s education may be secondary to adult power struggles.

The impact is personal

• Parents lose confidence that the system is stable enough to plan around.
• Teachers and school staff may become less willing to report concerns or take professional risks.
• Students absorb the consequences of interrupted initiatives, shifting priorities, and inconsistent leadership.
• Community partners hesitate when they cannot tell who actually holds influence or what direction the district will take next.
• Taxpayers fund repeated leadership searches, legal disputes, consultants, public-relations efforts, and administrative turnover while schools still face urgent academic and safety needs.
• The city’s long-term economic future suffers when too many young people remain below grade level or leave school without a reliable path to college, credentials, or sustainable work.

Memphis does not need another vague promise of reform. It needs governance that can be inspected by the public.

What Stand for Children Tennessee owes Memphis

Stand for Children Tennessee should issue a complete, public response to these questions—not a carefully limited statement, not a social-media post, and not a response routed through political allies.

If the organization believes Orrin’s involvement was proper, it should explain why. If it believes the Feagins termination was necessary, it should identify the evidence it relied upon and describe the student-centered improvements that have resulted. If conflicts were properly managed, it should release the relevant policies and disclosures. If the organization’s work was separate from Orrin’s personal activity, it should state precisely where that separation begins and ends.

Just as importantly, the organization should explain what it will do now to help restore trust in MSCS:

• Support an independent review of communications and influence surrounding the Feagins termination.
• Call for clear conflict-of-interest standards for board members, advocates, consultants, and affiliated education organizations.
• Back meaningful whistleblower protections for district employees and contractors.
• Demand transparent public reporting on investigations involving safety, abuse, retaliation, fraud, and misconduct allegations, while protecting student and victim privacy.
• Focus advocacy on measurable academic recovery, literacy, numeracy, student safety, teacher retention, and graduation readiness—not just political outcomes.
• Commit to public disclosure when its staff, board members, contractors, or partners communicate with elected school board members about personnel or governance decisions.

Memphis parents do not need organizations to “stand” near power. They need organizations willing to stand up to power—even when the people involved are allies, donors, board members, consultants, or friends.

The community should insist on the same standard from the school board, MSCS leadership, charter-school leaders, advocacy organizations, political consultants, and the media: show the records, disclose the relationships, answer the questions, and put children ahead of influence.