Okay, everyone. Thank you for joining us. Today is June 16th. It is 6:35 PM, and we have started our contracts committee. Thank you for all joining. For those that haven't joined yet, this meeting is being recorded for the record. And as I go through the meeting, I just shared the agenda that shows what this meeting will be about. So I would like to discuss or at least talk about the norms and behaviors.
So the norms and behaviors of this meeting will go as follows. So basically, each person that is joining must be on one screen with one mic, just to limit any confusion as to who is who. All comments go to the committee, not to any members of the public. Just so that we maintain civility. Public comment is limited to the agenda. That way, that will save time. And no DOE presentations and no DOE rebuttals. And, of course, the main one is first,
we listen, and then we respond. That will just give everyone an opportunity to share and perspectives to be heard. So we have two committee members here. So I will start with the introductions. So I will start with me. I am Faradji Hanna Jones. I am the Panel for Education Policy member appointee for the Community Education Council for Brooklyn, and glad to be here. And I will be your chair for the contracts committee for today.
And I will popcorn it over to my colleague next to me. Hello, everyone. Adriana Alisea Schieffer. I represent Queens CECs on the Panel for Educational Policy, and I chair the Utilization Committee. Are there any other PEP members that are present? All right. Let me turn my camera on. Okay. I will go to the next item. So today, what we'll talk about or actually discuss is the review of all the
agenda items for the contracts that will be voted on for this upcoming PEP meeting, which will be in Brooklyn at Brooklyn Prospect. And that meeting will be at six o'clock tomorrow, and all 23 items will be up for vote. And generally, what we want to do here in the contracts committee is we want to have some level of oversight and understanding as to the vendors and then the amount of money that's going into certain areas for these contracts.
So a lot of questions do occur during our meetings. But we want to get ahead and dissect a little bit more so that we're a bit more effective in terms of looking at these contracts rather than it being up for a vote and then kind of being somewhat of a rubber stamp. And that's what we want to prevent, is we don't want it to be a rubber stamp once all of these contract items is here. So we want to make sure that we are discussing them thoroughly, and then any questions that do
surface are addressed. So I will share my screen. I'm going to stop sharing my screen, but I also want to pull up the contracts agenda for those to see. And again, if you're not here physically, this meeting is recorded. So for the record, so it can be viewed at a later date, so that there'll be clear understanding as to the intent. Let me just try to find my agenda real quick. All
right. All right, I'm going to share my screen again. Get it shared. All right. See that. Okay, so the first item is item agenda one And this is the request for authorization to contract with multiple vendors to provide related
and supplemental services for special education. So, the procurement method is as follows. Following the estimated highest annual amount of $613,663. And then the estimated total amount, $4,840,989. The funding source shows that it's a tax levy. Is the contract retroactive? No, it's not. And then there's the contract term.
In terms of the vendors' names, those are listed below as well. And can these names also be researched? Yeah. So the vendor contract managers' names can be researched, and then the lead contracting officers are also there listed. All right. Getting down to the purpose. The purpose, of course, is for the Department of Education request authorization on behalf of the office of related services to contract the vendors named below to provide special education related services to students with special
needs. These services are for preschool ages three and five and school ages from five to 21. These are for students that have IEPs and then also IESPs. Those who don't know those acronyms, IEP is an Individualized Education Program, and the IESP is the Individualized Education Service Program. And, of course, these committees are on the preschool special education and committees for special education, and these contracts will replace contracts that will
expire this year on August 31st. So, in terms of the discussion of this contract, the DOE is mandated by federal and state law to evaluate students and provide special education service where indicated, including monolingual and bilingual related services. And then there's more information in terms of how to utilize these contract services and where it's unable to meet this mandate. Also, a listing of the related services that's
provided to the contracts that's awarded. Okay. I want to point out a couple things that I think I appreciate in this contract and I think might be relevant, and I wish that we could apply them elsewhere. It says that the OERFP, if you scroll down a little bit- Yeah ... it says that OERFP is the preferred method. And then if you go all the way to the bottom, it says, "Use of the OERFP procurement will also allow DOE to request further
clarification and refinement of proposals prior to making award recommendations." I'm not sure if this is in all of them. It might be, and I might have just missed it, but I think that's great that they have this option. You said this is all the way at the bottom, that last part? Yes. Where it's the last part of that paragraph where it says, "The OERFP procurement allows DOE to request further clarification and refinement." That's probably in all of them- Okay ... and I missed it, but I think it's great that we have that option. Okay, I'm going to move on to the second-
Mm-hmm ... agenda item. The second agenda item will be the math coaching and professional development. Yep. And that will be the second item on this agenda for tomorrow in our contracts. The procurement method is listed there. Also, the estimated highest annual amount, which is $60,000. Mm-hmm. And then, of course, the estimated total amount, $300,000. The funding source is tax levy and city/state reimbursable. Want to make sure we get some clarity on tax levy,
what that means for those who might be watching this. Can we promote Noah and ask him to? Hi. He's right there as an attendee. Okay. Mr. Noah, if it's possible, could you come off mute? You don't have to give a complete definition, but give us a brief understanding of what the tax levy and city state reimbursable means. If you can. And if you're not there, that's okay. I can ask this question again, just so that we can have it understood. So on agenda item one, it says that if the contract is retroactive,
meaning? Like the retroactive meaning, we've already been- That we- ... dealing with them, and so we owe a certain amount back to them, I guess. Okay. We've continued to work with them past the life of the contract. All right. So another question we should ask Noah, too. In the discussion piece, when we... We can talk about that. Yeah. No, I have a question regarding New York City Solves. So in the discussion area, it says that to help ensure that its students achieve the higher standards in mathematics, that adoption of next generation math learning standard, NGMLS-
Mm-hmm ... requires the DOE must acquire professional development services for its teachers, leaders, coaches, administrators, and support staff. These services will increase math content and pedagogical knowledge, support the implementation of NGMLS, and align resources to improve student achievement. These services will also support schools and learning communities as they plan and conduct effective instruction and professional development in math. I should have asked this during our contract briefing, but I did not read this as closely as I should have initially.
And I just want to confirm that New York City Solves is aligned with this next generation math learning standard. I'm sure that it is. This is probably the next gen standard that is spoken about often. But I'm not 100% sure. Okay. In some parts of this discussion, and of course the acronyms, again, want to just make sure that everyone knows that NGMLS means Next Generation Math Learning Standard. And this is another contract where the vendor
is using student data in some form or fashion. And it doesn't really go into exactly how that data is then stored or deleted or... And what- It says- ... is being used to collect that data? Right. All it says is that the recommended vendor's services introduce shifts in pedagogy and provide direction on efficient and effective ways to use student data to inform instructional practices that will improve student achievement and prepare them for college and careers in math. And it's probably just how we use their test scores to align better study practices, but I would like to know that for sure.
Especially since then it says, "Program delivery methods includes customized workshops, support, and coaching." Okay. Hello. Hey. Can you explain what tax levy is for the- It's like funding from the city's operating costs. Say it again. Like funding from the city's operating costs. Oh. So it's like operational budget. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, yes. I remember this. Like city council funding, we view the same way as tax levy.
Okay. City council, yeah. Like we view it the same as discretionary spending. Okay. Interesting. Cool. Yeah, we were just looking at the vendors and how they were using student data. Like what were they- Yeah ... using to collect the student data. So- Austin, you would probably know this. New York City Solves is aligned with the Next Gen standards, right? Is that correct? Yes. Okay, perfect. And Next Gen standards is the same thing as this next generation math learning standards. We're just calling it Next Gen standards. Yeah, unrelated to a potential high school. Correct. Yeah. Correct. Okay.
Gotta make that clip somewhere. I love it here. Okay. Okay. We're going to move down to the next agenda item. So the next agenda item is the professional development for school leaders and teachers. And there's a procurement method there. The estimated highest annual total, $830,000. Estimated total amount, $4,150,000. Funding source. And the contract term, which is for five years with the option. Option is one in three years? Okay. And the options amount is
$2,490,000. All right. So there's the vendors' names. And then, of course, the purpose for the DOE request authorization on behalf of the Office of Curriculum Instruction and Professional Learning to contract with the below named vendors to provide PD for school leaders and teachers. PDs meaning professional development. And- We've approved so many of these. Yes. I'm going to do a count probably tonight, definitely before July's meeting, of how many contracts we have approved and the
total dollar amount. Yes. Of just PD. Yeah. And this is another one where they're collecting... It doesn't say whether it's student data. It just says that for number five, data-driven decision-making and teacher effectiveness. Just a lot of data collection. Also to jump around, this is the first one in this packet that talks about a training session being conducted for the committee members. Which they get an overview of the process and a scoring rubric. That doesn't happen in every single one, but I'd like to know what the
determining factors are for the evaluation committee to either receive additional training themselves in order to be able to evaluate the contract or whatever it is, versus that not being necessary. I'd also like these, in these documents, to give us a number of people who made up the evaluation committee. It just says it consists of, and then sometimes it will say a committee of more than three, and it will list four different offices that people have had to have come from. And I think it would just be helpful to know, for consistency's sake, that
PD contracts tend to be reviewed by an evaluation committee of 10 or more people. We try to keep it wider for those because we do approve so many of these, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I would like to understand that aspect of this a little bit more. Another part is which schools qualify for this? Is it whether it's within their budget that they get this money? Yeah. I think so. So if it's in their budget to get this service, it has to be in their budget.
I think that's why Central procures it, right? So that the schools can access it at a lower rate than they would if they purchased it at the market rate. Right. If they purchase it upfront from the vendor directly versus- Right. They pay more. Oh. Which is the DOE is able to negotiate, and they're also able to negotiate across a larger number of vendors so that you get not only a variety in vendor and a variety in programs that are available, but you also have a wider variety in price, right? Yeah. There are two different--
I like a central procurement. Mm-hmm. I think it makes things cheaper. Yeah. I think we can control- For sure ... the contracts even better. But I can also understand, there are schools who, they know what their students need- Mm-hmm ... their teachers need, that we don't necessarily set the pulse on. For sure. Yeah. So I think you get to weigh those two. Mm-hmm. So you said there's central procurement, and then there's schools that independently have the budget to pursue what they- If it's under a certain amount. Okay. Like I know-- I'm thinking. Know some schools that do like test prep. Mm-hmm. Right. And things like that. Mm-hmm. It's not across the board. It's not for every school.
I think there's an HBC contract. Yes. Yes. We're going to get to that. We'll get to that. Yeah. We're definitely going to get to that. That's what I'm saying. All right. So the purpose, again, to really look at these contracts is to kind of get an understanding exactly how this all works. You see dollar amounts. You see all of the acronyms. And what we want to do is we want to really demystify a lot of this so that it's much more understandable as to these services that are being-- the vendors that are coming and basically DOE giving me the monies, to get these vendors
for these contracts to be approved. So there's not much confusion. So it's going to be a bit redundant, but that redundancy is just to make us a bit more- Welcome to Bureau. Yeah, the redundancy is just for us to be a little bit more savvy and just to understand exactly how all this works, so that if we do advocate or there is something, an agenda item that we don't agree with, that we can make a convincing argument. And generally, that's how I feel like I can be effective, is having a convincing argument as to why
I'm not voting for an agenda item versus just saying yes to all. Can I ask a question? Yes, sir. What do you think would be most helpful for some of these things? I think contracting can be very confusing. Yes, very much. If there are things that we can do better. Well, I think having a forum like this- Mm-hmm ... and of course, capacity will build, and I will ensure that. I will very much make sure that capacity, at the very least, is built out and ensuring that people understand. Because there's a lot of acronyms that's thrown out.
There's a lot of bureaucratic language that's used in a lot of this. You can't really step away from it. You're going to have to really get into it, but it's going to take individuals to get in there and kind of puree it, so that we can really put it out there and say, "Hey, this is what this really means." We are not cogs of the DOE, but we want to make sure that you also understand how this can be beneficial, and then you can make your opinion as to whether or not this can-- If it is or not. Mm-hmm. So I'm hearing you say that a layman's version of- Yes ... the contracts agenda every month could be helpful
and could be maybe distributed amongst the CECs- That's right ... in addition to whatever the superintendent's digest is, right? That part. However it is that that information is then shared, I think blending it up, like you're saying, having that information be not bare bones, but be the information that is required. Most of this, the public does not care about. Mm-hmm. Just the aspects of the discussion, and then especially if anything appears in vendor responsibility. I think if there's anything that the PEP can do,
it is definitely provide a broken-down or a layman's version. Or even a one-pager for each of the items. This month, it seems that most of them are rather short, but there are times where one agenda item is 60 pages long. Yeah. Right. And even if it is just the layman's version versus a one-pager that will kind of explain all of it. I think even the way that we organize the agenda, if it's done for the public, I think it makes more sense to always chunk it this way versus have any of them be out- Yes ... of sync. They've done a very good job of keeping it that way, but
there are times where it's almost impossible to do that. But that's the only change I would really make, is that the legalese and the contractese is just hard to follow if you're not in that, and if you're not doing that on a regular basis. I'm going to just pause for a second because- Sorry, I think a dictionary would also be extremely helpful. Yeah. When I was a PA president, I used- Oh, yeah ... an amalgamation of the DOE's acronym- Yeah ... thing, and our superintendent, Dr. Tammy Pate at the time, on the CEC's website, had an acronym decoder finder thing. Yeah. So it was all of those links together I would share with parents so that they could
decode. What does CPSE mean? What is IEP? What is- Yes ... Office of School Facilities versus the Office of District Planning? Blah, blah, blah. But having that specifically for contracts, just like we had the question about tax levy, and your answer was so easy. DOE treats that the same way we treat this, and it means X. Mm-hmm. So that's context and the information. Another PB? Another PB. Yeah. What does that mean? I know there's another person in, a participant in the
Zoom, and I want to... Scott Stoner, are you there? Yes. Could you introduce yourself for us? Scott Stoner, vice president of operations, Creamery Land Dairy. And, I'm going to give you an opportunity... Oh. I'm going to give you an opportunity to-- There's one of our items that's on this agenda. Mm-mm. But, I will continue on with the next point of the agenda. But thank you for introducing yourself.
Thank you. As we get into the portion of the agenda to discuss, then we'll get to that point. But thank you. The agenda item number five is the Arts Education Services. It's the request authorization for Arts and Education Services. The estimated amount is $285,000. And then, of course, the estimated total amount is $1,425,000. And, of course, the contract
is not retroactive. The contract term is five years. The option is one three-year term. And then of course, the options amount, which is shown there. The purpose is to request authorization of the Office of Arts and Special Projects to contract with the vendors to provide arts education services, which I think is amazing. The services will be provided at the discretion of each participating school or central office operating on behalf of the school or consortium of
schools. Is there anything that you want to discuss about this? Yes. So for this one, the evaluation committee also had a very unique makeup, it seems. In the second paragraph of that discussion, it says that all members of the committee have participated in developing the blueprint. And the blueprint is what they-- Earlier it says, "The approved vendors will deliver services that support and advance teaching and learning by building on the blueprint for teaching and learning in the arts," which is called the Blueprint of the New York State Learning Standards, or NYSLS, for the Arts, and the National Coalition of Core Art Standards.
So all of the people who participated in the evaluation committee were a part of the drafting of that blueprint. Nice. So I think that that is pretty incredible. Yes. But do we have that level of oversight and/or prior knowledge on all of the evaluation committees for the contracts? Because this one kind of seems like we went all in, or maybe we got lucky, and so we were able to go all in on this evaluation committee. And further to that, all of the members of the committee are currently implementing arts programming and possess years of experience within NYCPS
or DOE central offices. Mm-hmm. So this one seemed super stacked, which is great, because I think for me, then that means that this contract will be much more effective, right? That these art education services are going to be more impactful because the people evaluating them had a lot more skin in the game. Yes. But are all of our evaluation committees like that? Probably not. We should talk about standardizing. We should. We should talk about that. In addition to standardizing across professional acumen, professional whatever. Because these people
were involved in the creation of the blueprint and the National Coalition for Core Arts Standards, and they're currently participating in arts programming and have done so for a number of years. So that plus, like, 10 members plus whatever the rubric is. Yeah. So it says the proposals were evaluated by three evaluators. Is that for number five? Number four. Oh, four. The arts education one is five. I'm sorry. That one was PD. Oops. Note down. That's okay. Okay. I also think it's super interesting that out of 125 vendors,
that it was whittled down to four, and that just, again, echoes the effectiveness of that evaluation committee to be able to parse through 121 applications and say no to all of those and be left with four. And all four of them do very different things. Yeah. But yes, to your point, Noah, I think standardizing that would probably make the contracts and procurements office lives easier in terms of scheduling that. Mm-hmm. And rising tide. And these are the four, right? Arte- Yeah. ArteLatam and RiseBoro-
RiseBoro ... National New York. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And those are the four vendors. Mm-hmm. These are the four vendors here. I see in the bottom the awarded components. There's dance, ballet. So dance, music, theater, visual arts, moving image, and parent engagement is all the awarded components. Where? At the bottom of this. Of item five. Sorry. Oh, my pages are out of hand. Did you ever see that part? That part right there. Yeah. Yeah. I also think it's interesting. So if we look at the components here, all of them offer one of them. And if we just flip back to...
I'll do it here so you don't have to change it on there. But if we flip back to agenda item number three. Yep. Only one of them offers one of the components. The other two offer more than one. Yeah. And one of them offers four. I think it's interesting. And that item for- That's agenda item number three ... is for the request for professional development and school leaders. Yeah. Yeah. I just think that the component distribution is interesting. Okay. And I wish that that was explained a little bit further. There's just such a difference from this one to this one. Right. All right. Going down, we're at
item six, which is the request for authorization for student support services. One of my favorites. Um, sorry about that one. Yeah. The request for authorization for student support services, the estimated highest amount is $1,040,000. And the estimated total amount is $5,200,000. There's the funding source, and the contract is not retroactive, and there's the contract term with the options. And then there is the vendors' names.
And of course, the purpose of this is to request authorization of the Office of Safety and Youth Development to contract the vendors to provide direct student support services and increase opportunities for education enrichment. These programs will provide at the discretion of each participating school or central office operating on behalf of the school or consortium. So here are some of the discussion points. They propose 19 components. Any of those 19 components step out with
you? My main concern is in that last sentence of that discussion, that first paragraph under discussion where it says the services may take place on or off-site during the school day, after school, or on non-school days. Non-school days include weekends, summer break, and vacation days during the school year. I think that's a little bit too much unfettered access- Mm-hmm ... to students by outside adults. That is just a concern for me. Mm-hmm. That's the 19 family literacy. So
basically, for family literacy, services may take place- No, no. I think that's a separate- Oh, no? ... sentence, I think. It's not? I'm not sure, but none of the other ones have another sentence with them, which is why I assumed that it was just an explanation of all of them. Oh, yeah, because it just says family service- Right ... family literacy, period. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that is questioned. And then for the argument of standardization or additional information, this one says that the evaluation committee included principals, assistant principals, teachers, guidance counselors, instructional
specialists. What kind? Operational analysts. Of what sort? Grant managers. Okay. Directors from OSYD. It'd be nice to know which or who. Office of Post-Secondary Readiness. Who from that office, right? Office of Community Schools, Wellness, Division of Family and Community Engagement. Like, who from that office? If we have the names of the contract manager and the contracting officer and all of these other people are named, we can name the other folks. Mm-hmm. Or at least put their title in. Hello, Mr. Tricarico. Thank you for joining us.
Good evening, folks. I was just able to get off mute. Can you all hear me? Yes, we can. Sorry about my delay. I was actually in a meeting about tomorrow night's contract. Okay. And thank you for joining us. I appreciate it, sir. I do. Sure. My understanding, someone was just speaking about milk, a current vendor. Is that correct? Not yet. He just introduced himself. But we can jump to that contract. We do have some questions about the milk contract, like the longstanding milk contract in and of itself, because we hear from a lot of schools and a lot of students that
they end up tossing the milk, and they want to know if other alternatives could be provided, like juice or a different milk alternative. And Faraji and I have a very basic understanding of the fact that the milk meets a federal requirement for nutrition standards. But we were hoping that you could give us a more detailed response so that we can lead parents to this recording so that they can- Yeah, sure ... understand why that contract needs to exist. Thank you. Yep, sure. And I have discussed this in the past, but I think it's
getting more clear with the conversations I'm having, obviously with panel as well as principals and others. The USDA program requires us to serve at least two fluid milks. Currently, we serve a non-fat chocolate milk, we serve a non-fat milk, and we serve a 1% milk. These- Did you say- Sorry. Go ahead. You said it's the USDA? Yes, the USDA, who funds our entire program. Remember- Yeah. Okay ... our entire program is reimbursable, requires certain things to be served during the school day- Okay ... with breakfast and lunch, and part of those meals to be
reimbursable, you must offer milk. Every school district that is involved in the program must offer milk. Now, I'm saying offer very strong because- Okay ... students do not have to take it. That is very clear We have signs in every single school that tells children milk is offered, it is not mandated. And water is in every school. And I believe there's been conversations about not having working water fountains or not having water jets, and we can put a water jet in every single school. I know DSF, my counterpart there, Joel Lazarus, is making sure every single water fountain works, and I just spent a
whole lot of money buying all new water jets at Vernon, our headquarters, to be able to put that in any school that does not have it. Now, going back to the milk conversation. As of April 1st, we now have alternative milk available for any child that wants it. All we need to do is get a letter from the parent, and that is put on file in the school, and then we can offer alternative milk. That is lactose-free milk and soy milk- Oh ... that will be available. That is on our website. It's been on our website since April 1st, and we do have a significant uptick in students and parents asking for this
milk to be made available. But I want to, again, just make sure we're always saying to children, always saying to schools that it's offered. They do not have to take it. I'm going to pause there. Is that okay? Is there a form letter that parents can find on the website to make that request? Yes. It's all on our website. You can see it. Great. And all they need to do is write a letter to the principal. And just something to go back a little bit. We used to require a doctor's note. We do not require the doctor's note anymore, and we're very fortunate to be able to do that because we want to be able to get different types of milk to children. That'd be great. Yeah.
For sure. Now, the contract that's up tomorrow night is for milk distribution, which means it's just the vendors who are applying to this bid. They're the trucks and drivers that bring our milk to schools. That's the contract that's up tomorrow night on panel. Understood. Okay. That brings us to our agenda item. Thank you so much, Mr. Chris. Of course. I appreciate you educating me on that, and I do look forward to more conversation with you. I really do. Sounds great. And Noah can send you the link to our website and our
actual page- Yeah ... that has all of this information. And on that page, it's always great for you to take a look at the other services that we offer. And we're trying to be as transparent as possible and trying to get as much information out there. In between the school year, we always have conversations with CECs, with SLTs, with PTAs, and we're trying to get the message out more. So this conversation is always a great conversation for us to have. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, thank you, Chris. I appreciate you. Appreciate you all. Thank you. So, in the agenda item, we have a request to authorize and provide distribution-
Which will be around 7:00 ... of fresh milk and dairy products. And of course, the estimated highest annual amount is $10,232,212.21. And the estimated total amount is $30,696,636.63. The funding source is reimbursable, which means? I think that's what he was just getting at about the milk having to be served in order for- In order to get the- ... the funding to be- The funding. Okay ... given to them by the federal government.
Yeah. And I can give you a quick 101 on that. At the end of each school year, we submit the claim, which is to the federal government and the state, for every single meal that was served. We get reimbursed for that. It goes to the city- Okay ... and then the city gives that money right back to us. Got it. Okay. Contract is not retroactive, and the contract term is for three years, starting July 1st, 2026 to June 30th, 2029. For three years. The option is two years and one year,
and then there's the options amount. And then, of course, there are the contract managers there for the vendors. And of course, the leading contractor. All right. And then we'll discuss the purpose. The purpose is to request authorization on behalf of the Office of Food and Nutrition Services to contract with vendors referenced to provide distribution of fresh milk and dairy products to the DOE's approximate 1,300 operated school kitchens participating in breakfast and lunch programs. These contracts will replace
contract extensions set to expire at the end of this month. And of course, there's discussion seeking vendors to provide the acquisition of warehousing, handling, and distribution of fresh milk and dairy products, why not, to the DOE meal program throughout five boroughs. Sorry for interrupting. No, go ahead. Mm-hmm. When we have situations where we have a satellite school, so most recently, Queens High School of Sciences, where the lunch is delivered to the kids on a daily basis.
Are we also then delivering milk? So are we spending double the gas money to move those cartons of milk for those specific students? Or is the milk, like at Queens High School of Sciences, before they moved there at York, is the milk taken from York's supply? Is there an exchange? That's a great question. So we have two options there. So in schools that we can store supplies such as milk, such as some other things, and packaged apples, and condiments, and everything else, we will do that. If we cannot, we use a courier service.
So we package the meal at another site. My staff does all of that, puts it in a bag, makes sure it's reimbursable, and then we send it via courier service to that school. I can find out particular schools and how we do it. It's not the same across all schools. But if you're asking me- That's okay. Yeah. All right. That's okay. I'm sure that whatever the method is, it's what works for that school and that student body, so we can just leave that the way it is. Yep. Okay. I'm good to move to the next one. This is all very technical, and I think we should- Yeah. Yeah. Thank you so much, Mr. Chris. You guys got it. And Chris is fine. So thank you all.
This is the Southern gentleman in me. I'm sorry, brother. I appreciate that. I can't help it. I call people sir and ma'am and all that. You're my son, Chris, so there. I can't help it. Thank you all. We're going to go down to next item, which is item eight, the request authorizations to contract with New York City Outward Bound Center, Incorporated for crew expansion services. There's the estimated annual amount, there's the total amount, and there's the funding source, which is city council.
Yes, our city council does get the funding for our DOE services, which is awesome. Look at the EDF. And there's the contract term for three years, and then there's the option to one year. And then, of course, there's the contract type. So we have the vendors' names that are listed there, as well as the contract managers, the vendors' names. And then the purpose of this is, of course, request authorization on behalf of the Division of School Leadership to contract with New York City Outward Bound Center to expand Outward Bound crew model's
approach in over 100 secondary schools. So Outward Bound recruits and works with a cohort of schools each year, focusing on secondary schools. Schools are recruited in the spring and summer across all five boroughs through the basic application process. So Outward Bound anticipates that approximately 35 to 40 schools will return to the partnership and recruit 10 to 15 new schools each year. Any discussion? I think we need more contracts like this and fewer contracts focusing on
PD. Yeah. I think PD, in many cases, should be and could be handled directly by and at the superintendent's office. A lot of our superintendents are doctorate level or, at the very least, PhD candidates and are more than capable of providing professional development and mentorship. But programs like Outward Bound and other programs like this, I think are a dime a dozen, and we could use more of those. I think it's great that they're expanding to 10 to 15 schools over the next two years.
Sorry, over the next three years, rather. Mm-hmm. So that's like at the tail end of it going to be 45, and if they do their option of two, one years and that's-- I'm not good at math, but that's like 75 schools. It's very impressive. Mm-hmm. At the end paragraph, it says the request is to retroactive due to the grant timeline of Outward Bound's multi-step implementation process. Mm-hmm. And then, of course, it was recommended by the Chancellor's Committee of Contracts. All right. So we're going to go down to the next item. That next item is the request for authorization to contract with
Delaware State University to provide HBCU early college prep. I am a HBCU- They can have whatever they want at the end ... former HBCU student. HBCUs definitely get all of my props. So, I want to talk about this contract. So the estimated highest amount, $694,672. Of course, the two-- Circle this one because I want it written. $2,780,795.
And then there's the funding source. Let's get down to the vendors' names. Delaware State University, you know what it is. And then, the vendor's address, and then there are your vendors' names. The purpose, hereby request authorization on behalf of the Office of the First Deputy Chancellor to contract with Delaware State University. Just wish it was Howard and- ... other HBCUs, but we'll get there. Mm. We will definitely get there. To provide an early college prep, preparatory program for approximately 400 students.
I can call Fayetteville State University. Sure. They'll be more than happy- Yeah ... to come over here and help out. Would they? Fayetteville State University? Yeah. In North Carolina? Yes. Yeah. In North Carolina A&T, and- I think they're working specifically with Delaware first, though, because she's- Okay ... an alum of them. Yeah. Yeah. But they are obviously open to all of VA. Let me also add that Xavier University graduates more Black doctors than any other university in the country. So let that be a fact. And North Carolina Central- Yeah ... is one of the top law schools in the country. Yeah. So that's what people don't know. Yeah. So, HBCUs definitely serve a great deal of our
students in all the definite ways. So I'm very excited about this, because for a long time, I've been talking about HBCUs partnering with our schools and becoming a strong partner with our public school system, especially those that serve a predominantly Black demographic. And not just because they're Black, because they produce scholars. I saw Morehouse College graduate over 500 Black men
on their campus, all graduating with honors. And those honors live up to their names because they're able to go out into the world and not only compete, but also start their own industries, their own businesses, and do things that are just extraordinary, outside of the expectations of those who just feel that they are not deserving of them. So, it's a beautiful thing to see with this, and I'm totally on board with a early college prep
program. I seen something like this similar to a community college in Oregon. That college is Portland Community College, that actually partnered with Jefferson High School, which was also a predominantly Black high school. And basically, the kids that go through that program end up graduating with an associate's and moving on to four-year universities to transfer under their program, and it was heavily funded and very successful. So very proud to see this. All right. And I'll probably talk about it even more tomorrow.
So let's go to the next item. The next item is the request for authorization to contract with vendors. Before- Yes ... we get to that, can we just go over the vendor responsibility section? Of nine? Yeah. Yes. So there are a number of items that are listed here. Mm-hmm. I do not want to take away the severity of any of the investigations that are underway or the alleged activity that took place to lead to the investigations being open, but I think it is important to note that the students are still high school level
students, will be living at home, and will be engaging with the DSU curriculum, and this getting of the associates will happen from their desk in Southeast Queens. They will not be on the DSU campus, and therefore having to deal with any of the items that are noted here. I believe there is another school by the name of Bedford Academy in Brooklyn that's also participating- Hmm ... in this as well. Mm-hmm. I think they were participating in it maybe prior to
a contract. They have been pursuing something like this for- Interesting ... a long time. So, something we can look at. I would like to talk to the principal about that. But, yeah, they've been participating. Hmm. A few of their students already have college credits that are moving on to four-year universities. And do they do those classes from... Remember when I was in high school, I got college credits from Monroe, but I had to go to Monroe. That's a good question I need to ask. I've never heard them not being in the classroom while taking these courses. And you said the vendor's responsibilities.
We're good. That's fine. Does it mention anything about that? It doesn't. What it mentions in this one is material weaknesses found in an audit. Mm. The president of DSU was allegedly driving under the influence and recklessly driving. In 2023, a student protest was enacted because the students were reacting to allegations of poor communication in reaction to student-related incidents, incidences of excessive force. And then in 2019, there was a
lawsuit that was resolved via a non-disclosure agreement. These are things that are very concerning, but our students will not be on the DSU campus. Yes. They will not be directly subjected to Any of this. Okay. That's all. I just wanted to note that. Was this necessary? I'm just understanding. So this is just bringing this to our- It's absolutely necessary. Okay. I think if you're applying for a college, at least I would take into account what the president of the college is up to. Right. Absolutely. Because they have a fiduciary responsibility, they have a moral
responsibility, and I think that most colleges have a standard of ethics that they hold- Absolutely ... their students to, and therefore, the adults in the building should be held to that standard first. That's right. All right. So we're going to go to the-- Did you have any more? No. Okay. So we're going to go to the next item, that is the request for authorization to contract with vendors for the provision of 3-K and pre-K, another favorite of mine, for all services. Special education center-based programs. There is the estimated amount. There's the estimated total. Not going to give the number.
Maybe I should. $12,845,867.34. So the purpose of this is to request authorization on behalf of the Division of Early Childhood to contract with the below-name vendors to enhance existing preschool special education services to bring them in line with the DOE Birth to Five Early R and Education System. So the discussion is the New York State Education Department
established Universal Pre-K, or UPK program, which entitles eligible four-year-olds to receive two hours and 30 minutes of instructional programming for 180 days at no charge to their families. This is amazing. In March 2014, the New York State legislators approved a $300 million grant to expand full day pre-K kindergarten access in New York City. That was 2014. I am a beneficiary of that. Mm-hmm. And in April 2017, New York City
announced introduction of a 3-K for all program in order to expand high quality early childhood care education for New York City children. Not going to read on. Did you have any discussion? Yeah. I think the only part of this, well, not the only part of it, but the part of it that is most exciting for me when I read this was that the actual purpose of this is for the DOE now seeks to bring preschool special education programs under the umbrella of its Birth to Five programming by providing contracts to fund enhanced services. Specifically, the enhancement of contracts provides funding to allow
programs to extend program day length to six hours and 20 minutes per day, and align expectations and supports to the city's Pre-K For All and 3-K for all programs. In addition, the enhancement contract aims to increase access to services in the least restrictive environment by funding general education slots to allow providers to independently offer special class in an integrated setting or SCIS classrooms. And that's very exciting. It allows more of our babies that are going to come into pre-K and come into the CPSC world and then into the
IEP world and beyond. It allows them to fold in earlier, allows integration, I guess- Yes ... from the very beginning. Or I guess at the very beginning of their interaction with New York City public schools. Oh. And then right above that, it explains why they have to do it this way. Because in New York State, preschool special education services may only be provided by organizations that have been authorized by SED under the New York State Education law. So... And of course, for decades, many of our families, particularly in our working class,
and of course, at the same time, living in very marginalized neighborhoods, could not afford such education. And, as a result, the lack of any level of learning mediation contributes to our children's development, as they get into the higher grades. And, there's a great book about this called, "The Pedagogy of Confidence" by Yvette Jackson. And she talks about, she studied and researched the valuable scientific research about learning mediation,
and the cognitive development that is constantly evolving. She says cognitive development is not static. It is dynamic. And so, having the ability to be able to be exposed to early childhood learning at a very early age proves that you will go on to excel in academic programming and of course, from college and beyond. And I think this is excellent. My wife and I are beneficiaries of this, as well as other families in
my daughter's cohort that have gone on and done extraordinary things despite any of their deficiencies. Any deficiencies they have been able to successfully recover in their reading and also in their development as students. And I have to thank New York public school system For adopting this, and I have to thank the previous administrations, for also making sure that this stayed together. And it only goes up from here, and I'm really, really excited about this contract and where it's landing.
So New York City is definitely on another level when it comes to this. So early childhood program is a match. Pretty dope. So should we go on to the next one? Yeah. All right. So we go to the next agenda item, which is agenda item 11. This is a request for authorization and for negotiated services, for city transition seats. All right. So the procurement method was negotiated services contract per DOE procurement policy and procedures. And then there, of course, there is the estimated highest
amount, which is $4,285,960. And then of course, the estimated total amount, $4,285,960. And then of course the funding source is the city tax levy. The contract is retroactive. The contract term is from July 1st, 2025 to June 30th of course, this month of this year. The option is one year. You see the vendor's names there. And of course, the purpose of this is for the
New York City Department of Education, excuse me, request authorization on behalf of the early childhood education to enter into negotiated services contract with the vendors listed for one year to provide high-quality instructional programming as part of the Pre-K for All and the Pre-K for All programs. So in the discussion, basically gives a little bit of description in terms of the request for the proposals when it was released, and says it was sought to identify eligible high-quality
vendors willing to collaborate with DECE to provide Head Start services for eligible children ages six weeks to five years old. This is another one. Any discussion? For this one, my concerns are in the vendor responsibility area. I know that they're- Mm-hmm ... a little earlier in the discussion, it says that, the vendors are longstanding partners, I guess or just as partners- Mm ... that the families depend on. But this first one here- Yes ... is concerning and-
Yeah ... um- Let's talk about it. So it says on March 28th, 2023, a former employee of affiliate Happy Dragon of USA Inc., HD USA, engaged in conduct that subsequently resulted in the employee's arrest and guilty plea to endangering the welfare of a child while servicing privately enrolled students at a DOE contracted site. Mm. In 2025, a news article reported that HD USA allegedly failed to notify parents of the abuse and issued a false report of the incident. In my opinion, that
alone is disqualifying. Yeah. That was my opinion. Okay. Additionally, HD USA failed to notify the DOE of the former employee's arrest and criminal investigation as required pursuant to the terms and conditions of its DOE contract. Again, in my opinion, that in of itself should be disqualifying for this vendor. We continue. Mm. On March 30th, 2023, HD USA became aware of the alleged abuse, and the former employee was immediately terminated. Additionally, the vendor conducted a review and assessment of its
existing policies and retrained staff. HD USA denied issuing a false report and advised that the incident report was completed by the former employee, and further advised that it did not notify the DOE of the criminal investigation because following the employee's termination, it maintained no involvement with the former employee and was not aware of any subsequent criminal investigation. So essentially, they didn't need to tell the DOE because they fired the guy and never spoke to him again.
Right. Mm. And their policies to that point allowed the person who was accused of endangering the welfare of a child to write the report. Interesting. Yes. And then it continues. On November 21st, 2025, the New York City Department of Education issued HD USA a show cause letter based on concerns regarding the safety and welfare of children at a DOE contracted site, the transparency and ethical integrity of its business practices, and HD
USA's compliance with the New York Social Services law. On February 24th, 2026, which was less than four months ago, the DOE issued a letter to HD USA indicating that it would be closing the matter out with no additional actions taken and may revisit the matter if additional information comes to light At this time, there is currently no sufficient cause based on the vendor's response and all the information available to find the vendor in default of the contract.
Yet, paragraph four, we have where it says, "On March 30th, 2023, HD USA became aware of the alleged abuse, and the former employee was immediately terminated." And then it says that they did not notify the DOE of the criminal investigation. And above that, it says they were required to do so pursuant to the terms and conditions of their contract. So if they have violated the terms of their contract and they were issued a show cause letter,
and the DOE has at some point questioned the ethical integrity of their business practices and whether or not they're in compliance with the social services law, and these are children aged six weeks to five years old. Yeah. Endangering the welfare of a child aged six weeks to five years old is a pretty serious- Yeah ... allegation. And for the employee to have been terminated, it seems to me, I would deign to believe that HD USA felt the need to CYA and fire that employee. Right. But that does not take away from the fact that they hired the employee in the first
place. The employee had the ability to generate a report, and then they didn't lose their contract with the DOE. Mm-hmm. It goes on to tell us that separately, as a result of this incident, a lawsuit was filed by the child's family in the Supreme Court of the state of New York, Queens County, and that lawsuit is currently pending. Then, at the tail end of it, it says, "As the above matters have either been resolved or are pending, and as the vendor's performance has been satisfactory on prior DOE contracts, the DOE determines the vendor to be responsible." The DOE determines HD USA to be a responsible vendor.
Yeah. A vendor who employed- Yes ... someone who was terminated and is currently the subject of an investigation. Yes. The subject of a lawsuit. Okay. Okay. So- I think this is something that panel member, what is her name? Yadira. Yeah. I don't remember her last name at the moment, but she has a few times flagged for us when early childhood contracts have been concerning, and I wonder if she has read- This ... this contract- Yeah ... agenda item, and if she has the same concerns that we have. That's right. And this is why we go through these agenda items, and this is why we're going
to have this committee, because there is so much information that's being brought to us, but when you really go down and read it, it really does create inquiry into a question as to why should it be approved or if it should not be approved. Mm-hmm. So we actually are looking at that. But this is why we do this. It's really unfortunate. Should we go now to the next one? Yeah. Almost done. Was that 11? Yeah, that was 11. Now we're on 12. That's another easy one. Oh, wow. $4 million too. Okay, so item 12 is the request for
authorization for a negotiated service agreement with SUNY and CUNY colleges and universities to provide scholarship programs for special education and teaching and related services. So, we have the procurement level method there. We have the estimated highest annual amount, also the estimated total amount, the funding source, and the contract is retroactive, and the contract term from August,
that's September, September 1st, 2023 to August 31st, 2026, this year. For three years. There are no options, and there's no options amount, and the contract type is requirements. And there's the vendors list below. We have the list of names from incentives and speech programs. Also, the purpose. So the DOE requests authorization on behalf of the DOE of Human Resources for negotiated service agreements with the institutions of higher education
listed below for scholarship programs in support of special education in teaching and clinical disciplines, as well as related services. The New York City Department of Education, on behalf of Division of Human Resources, offers scholarship and incentive programs, which works with the New York State accredited graduate colleges, universities to participate in the DOE scholarship program. Okay? The vendors must offer master's and doctoral
degree programs in any or all various areas of discipline of special education and its related services. Institutions must offer master's degrees, which are doctoral degrees for therapists that lead to state certification in traditional teaching and clinical shortage areas. I think it's pretty cool. Do you have any discussion? Yeah. I think the most important sentence in that whole discussion bit is the last one right there where it says, "Full or partial scholarships will be
offered in exchange for a service commitment to work in a high needs- Ooh ... underserved New York City public school." I think that should be changed to strategically under-resourced or strategically under-supported or systemically underserved. Yeah. But whatever. But that sentence right there, so that we understand the purpose of this contract- Yes ... is not just giving SUNY or CUNY students money. It is saying- That is a good catch ... take this scholarship and commit to this community. Yeah. Come and learn with this community and give a commitment to this community.
So it doesn't appear to be specific, so high needs tends to be much broad. Yeah. Does that seem to be a broad statement, or does it seem to be more definitive? I think that for this one, the scholarships in exchange for the service commitment would specifically be services offered for bilingual special education, for blind and visually impaired students, for students in need of bilingual speech, language pathology, and audiology. Same thing for monolingual, and then the related services are listed,
so OT and PT, occupational therapy and physical therapy. Okay. So it does kind of show what the services that the community will have access to are, and these are very important, bilingual special education chiefly. Vendor responsibilities? I didn't see any on there. Yeah. Nope. Oh, it says that because they're a government entity, they're exempt from passport, but I did appreciate that they included what the acronyms all mean. State. Their definition box. Yeah. Super helpful. Pay very attention to that. That's great. I appreciate that very much. The next one is a very similar contract, but it's for private universities, and
the two private universities on there are Hofstra and LIU. Is it under the same amount? Let's see. I don't think it's the same amount. No, it's not the same amount. No. Okay. Yeah. Let's see. Yeah, the contract term is different as well. Okay. All right. So agenda 13, request for private universities, provide scholarship programs for education, special education teaching and related services. This is pretty much the same as the agenda Trying to just see if there's any differences here other than this is for private.
Mm-hmm. Okay. Mm-hmm. It is also offering vendors must offer master's and doctoral degree programs, various areas of disciplines- Yeah ... and special education related services. So yes, it's very similar, if not the same. No. I don't have any discussion to add to this. No, I think it's good that they're offering it- Yeah ... at two of the private universities. Hofstra being one. CUNY being sort of downstate, which is- Yeah. Yeah, Sophie Davis is a great school. Oh, it's actually the Health Science Center. It's not even Sophie Davis. All right, so there is a vendor responsibility that I want to- Mm-hmm ... address. So, vendors recommended for the award, principal owners, officers were
subjected to a background check and have determined to be responsible. No worthy information was found for the following vendors. So Long Island University in April 2020 news article revealed that a class action lawsuit was filed against LIU for having failed to adequately refund or reimburse students for tuition and other fees they paid to have in person on class, on campus classes and other activities. Mm-hmm. So this is during COVID. It is COVID related class action, but it was closed.
It was an unprecedented act of God type situation. Mm-hmm. The vendor advised that the litigation was dismissed. Yeah. However, the plaintiffs filed an appeal, and on February 25th, 2022, court issued a summary judgment in LIU's favor. Yeah. The matter is now closed. Just full transparency on that. As the matter above has been resolved, and in light of the vendor's overall exceptional performance on DOE contracts, the DOE determines the vendor to be responsible.
Okay. All right, so next item is 14 And that's the request authorization to amend contracts with vendors for the provision of birth to five services. There's the estimated amendment amount and then the estimated amendment total. The contract term from January 1st of this year, and then it will end at the end of this month. And then, of course, the vendor's names are listed below. We have the Chief of Finance, People & Culture, Division of Early Childhood Education, the Chief of Policy and Program Implementation, Division
of Early Childhood Education, and then of the Chief Administrator, Health and Human Services. So, the DOE requests authorization on behalf of the Early Childhood Education to amend certain vendor contracts to birth to five services to provide high-quality early childhood service in alignment with NYCPS programming policies for infant and/or toddlers. So in discussion, of course, the DOE released the first request for proposals
for birth to five services, included both extended day and year services available to income-eligible children, and school day and year services available to any child eligible for pre-K for all or III-K for all services. So scrolling down a little bit. The birth to five request for proposals, that's RFPs, offer two types of service models: school day and year, okay? Service were available to all pre-K aged children and III-K aged
children with NYC residency for six hours and 20 minutes daily for 180 days annually, extended day and year. So basically, 180 days annually. Mm-hmm. Right? And then we have the extended day and year. Okay, got that. Mm-hmm. Were available to children from ages six weeks to five years old, whose families meet income and other eligibility requirements based on federal and state childcare block grant
guidelines for eight or 10 hours daily for 225 or 260 days annually. Mm-hmm. Okay. So these three vendors were then allotted 12, eight, and 27 additional seats respectively in order to meet the needs of the school day and the extended day and year- Okay ... children in the area. Because they got additional funds, so they can open up additional seats, and the additional seats are not costing us any more. It says that the pricing for the seats remain consistent with the base contract.
Right. And then it says the standard program model is 260 day year-round program for 10 hours per day. Okay. These services will include daily center-based play, gross motor. Okay, great. You had any discussion? Yeah. No, the vendor responsibility aspect of this amounts to poor bookkeeping. Mm-hmm. And the vendor is going to engage in an audit or will share the results of their audit. Mm-hmm. I think it's great that we're offering more seats in zip codes that require additional
childcare to be available to them, right? They call them here high economic or high community need seats. I think it's great. Okay. There's the vendor responsibility. Review of the Cypress Hills Local Development Corporation. Identify the following information, the audits that you just mentioned- Mm-hmm ... deficiencies in timeliness of recordkeeping, but the DOE determined that they were responsive. Okay, go to the next one. All right, so we got the request for authorization to amend Community
School Services contracts. There is the annual amendment amount. There is the estimated amendment total. Contract term, which was for July 1st, 2024 to June 30th, 2027. And the vendors' names are listed there. The purpose of this was the DOE to request authorization on behalf of the Office of Community Schools To amend contracts with the community-based organizations listed below to work with the DOE
schools to implement the community school strategy. And then there's discussion. Community schools focus on family engagement, strong community partners, and tailored support for students and families to overcome obstacles affecting academic success. All community schools adhere to three foundational pillars, rigorous academics, comprehensive services, and collaborative partnerships. So let's talk about the rigorous academics. You have programs that prepare students for college, careers,
and citizenship with high-quality curriculum. That's debatable. Expanded. What's that? That's debatable. Oh. Expanded learning opportunities and accountability. There's also comprehensive services based on the community's needs. Schools offer integrated programs to address holistic needs and engage families as key partners. Collaborative partners, school work with local entities, including government agencies, nonprofits, and businesses to maximize resources and impact. All right. Any discussion? I think all of our schools should be community schools.
Yes. The opportunity to work so closely with CEOs ingratiates the community into the student experience, and it kind of gives the student an understanding that everyone in the community is involved in their success, and everyone is, um, invested in their success. These schools are also more expensive to fund, um, but I think that that is, um, worth the trade-off. Money well spent. Yes. Are there any vendor... There's vendor details there? Mm-hmm. Okay. Hmm. It's a record-keeping issue for one of them, and-
Yeah ... uh, the other has a much longer. Cool. Okay. Yeah. The Southern Queens Park Association has quite a few issues. Lots of issues. We got poor record keeping. Um- Depositing business checks into a personal bank account? Yeah. Mm. Falsifying time sheets and invoices. Yep. Um, in March 2022, Southern Queens Park Association was informed by the New York City Department of Education's Office of Special Investigations, OSI, that an employee of SQPA was under investigation. The vendor advised that the individual was terminated from employment
in 2023, and as a result of the OSI investigation, the DOE's Office of Personnel Investigations, OPI, has barred the individual from further employment on DOE contracts. Mm. Additionally, SQPA has since implemented training for staff members working in DOE buildings to prevent future incidents from occurring, and the matter is closed. It's interesting. Yes. Very much. Um, they also had a corrective action plan, um, but it-- DOE has since been advised that the vendor is in compliance with their corrective action plan, which is a good thing. Um, and the other note is about a case that was settled.
The amount that it was settled for is listed there as well. Right. We'll go to the next one. All right. So we have agenda item sixteen, request for authorization to amend the contract with Elite Learners Incorporated to provide crisis management services. Okay. Um, the estimated amendment amount, um, they want to amend. So this is an amendment contract. This is a contract. Mm-hmm. So the, uh, annual amendment amount is $100,000.
The estimated amendment total is $200,000. The funding source, of course, is city council. Uh, the contract is retroactive. The contract term is from, uh, July 1st, uh, 2025 to June, um, uh, June 30th, 2027. So in two years. Mm-hmm. Uh, the vendor's name is Elite Learners. Yep. Uh, there's the vendor's address, which is in Brooklyn. There's the vendor's names, and the purpose of this is to, uh, for the DOE, uh, to request authorization on behalf of the Office of Safety and Prevention Partnerships to
amend the contract with Elite Learners- To expand crisis management services into two additional sites. That is PS 284 in Brownsville and in IS 285, Meyer Levinson Senior High School. Under this amendment, Elite Learners will provide service for two additional schools, Progress High School for Professional Careers and EVC High School for Public Service. Any discussion with that? It looks like on behalf of the Office of
Safety and Prevention Partnerships, this amendment is for the fiscal year 2026 and 2027. Mm-hmm. And so it's a city council funded program. It looks like there are four more, two in school and two in-school sites, which is great. Yeah. I also think it's interesting that they note that it was a competitive sealed bid, was not done... This was a city council discretionary grant naming the vendor, and that's good information to have. Yeah. But I don't understand necessarily what that means, but okay. Under this amendment, service will continue to be delivered weekly
throughout the 2026-2027 fiscal year by experienced facilitators and mentors with demonstrated youth engagement experience. Okay. Mm-hmm. All right, let's go down to vendor responsibilities. They're good. They're good. Yeah. The little bit above that is the part that I don't understand. Then DOE has sole discretion to renew this contract each year. The renewal is contingent on city council discretionary awards. Are we saying that, like, we will renew it if we get the money, but we might not also? Right. Okay. All right. Next agenda item is
item 17. All right, so item 17 is a request for authorization to amend health and human services contracts to provide allowances for future budgetary increases. So we have the highest estimated amount, which is $648,000, and $970 there, and then the estimated total amount, which is $648,970.90. The funding source, tax levy. It is retroactive. The vendors are listed. Mm-hmm.
The purpose is for the authorization on behalf of the Office of Community Schools, Office of Student Pathways, and Early Childhood Education to amend health and human services. Listed below, to include allowance clause to provide a contingency for future citywide funding initiatives. So we have discussion there. Mm-hmm. Recommendations for a better contract for New York. Joint task force to get nonprofits paid on time. Yeah. Okay. New York City is amending current
HHS contracts to include an allowance clause. Mm-hmm. This allowance clause will eliminate the administrative burden of processing amendments for anticipated budgetary increases, such as the cost of living increases- Mm-hmm ... changes in indirect cost rates- Yep ... and other funding increases by incorporating the allowance clause- Ooh ... in HHS contracts. The expectation is that this change will significantly reduce contract delays and create a more
efficient contract process. All right. I think it's that they have a set of recommendation because doing this now, so that's according to this document, doing this now is going to be less burdensome than having to do it on a case-by-case or piecemeal basis. Right. And then the importance of these dollars going to this allowances contract, I guess is for the community school. This is for community schools. Right after that, it talks about the community school's strategy and
how it's based on evidence, and this is critical for our students to be able to continue these services and to pay New Yorkers a fair wage- Mm-hmm ... at the same time. In addition to fair wages, like the vendor responsibility portion talks about Satanic having a class action lawsuit filed against them for unpaid wages. Yep. But that was resolved via arbitration, and the settlement payment has been paid in full. Yes. All right, we're going to the next one. That is the request to amend another contract
with vendors for the provision of birth to five services. There is the estimated amendment amount, and then there's the estimated amendment total The contract is retroactive, contract term is for one year. Mm-hmm. Vendor's names are listed below. The purpose was to require authorization on behalf of the Division of Early Childhood Education to amend certain vendor contracts for 3K, pre-K, and pre-K standard day and year services to provide additional hours of service
daily as part of the school day and year plus service pilot. Okay. Mm-hmm. In this discussion, in terms of what happened in 2029, March of 2029, the DOE released the first request for proposals for birth to five services. There is the request for proposal. Mm-hmm. R1267. Services include both extended day and year services available to income-eligible children, and school day and year services available to any child
eligible for pre-K and 3K for all services. Okay. Okay, I see- The concerns, yes. In the discussion, it says DECE, so Department of Early Childhood Education- Yeah ... performed a needs analysis for 3K and pre-K Head Starts and extended day year programs within zip codes that had an economic need- Wow ... index of 75% or higher for the school year '24, '25. Mm-hmm. The analysis determined that there were 11 zip codes that have an economic need index of 75% or higher and do not have
any or a small percentage of Head Start or EDY seats, right? So extending hours of service to SDY programs in these identified areas with a high economic need index and no extended day and year or Head Start seats could be extremely beneficial for families. Mm-hmm. That's fantastic. If we go down to the bottom of that page, under Vendor Responsibility- Yeah ... the first one that is listed is Creative Minds Daycare, and it says, "A review of Creative Minds Daycare NYC Corp's passport submission revealed the following caution.
In April of 2023," which is just over three years ago, "the Special Commissioner of Investigation for the New York City School District, SCI, substantiated that the owners of Creative Minds attempted to circumvent the New York City Department of Education's contractually mandated staff clearance requirements." Again, these are people that are being trusted or entrusted with- With your kids ... birth to five services. Yeah. A person who is interested
in conspiring to circumvent a mandated clearance requirement for a staff member is not a person who is trustworthy with other people's children. Yes. In my opinion. So I think that it's ridiculous that, again, we have vendors who are engaging in dangerous and bad behavior still remaining on a list of vendors in good standing. Yes. Then, goes on to say, "On February 7th, 2024, DOE issued Creative Minds a show cause letter
based on staff clearance practices and not adhering to DOE contractual requirements." So again, another instance of DOE issuing a show cause letter because the vendor violated the contractual agreement or contractual requirements. "Then subsequently, on the 15th of May, 2024, DOE issued an updated show cause letter to Creative Minds due to potential violations of its contract staff clearance and conflict of interest provisions." So that's now three. Three. That's three marks against them.
"In March '25, DOE placed Creative Minds on a two-year corrective action plan, where it was required to transfer full ownership interests and ensure that all staff have the appropriate security clearances and requisite qualifications for their positions. Additionally, the vendor agreed to adhere to all contractual and licensing agreements of the DOE, the New York City Department of Mental Health and Hygiene, as well as other city, state, and federal agencies, and have its leadership and staff attend training each year the CAP remains in effect.
The DOE's Division of Early Childhood Education advised that the vendor is currently in compliance with its CAP." Here's the thing. What happens when the CAP is removed or completed and they do this again? Well, we have- Or a person is hired who does not meet the appropriate security clearances? That's right. We have a situation we saw with Happy Dragon. Yeah, and I think it's also ridiculous that the DOE Contracts Office puts the sentences where it says the DOE determines the vendor to be responsible. Right. And that's- How? Yes. How? They're clearly not responsible.
Just because they are, in the moment, being accountable is not the same thing. When they were left to their own devices, when they were left to their own decision-making, they chose poorly. They chose to, allegedly, try to circumvent the process. Then they tried to conspire to circumvent the process and the training. Mm-hmm. These are not responsible people. And we're talking about five years of this. This is not one year and then... It gets worse when we get to Rainbow. So the review of Rainbow Child Development Center-
Yeah ... identified the following caution. From 2020 to 2023, so in the height of the COVID pandemic, which is not over by the way, the New York City Special Commissioner Investigations, SCI, investigated the enrollment practices of Rainbow Child. SCI reported that Rainbow Child violated its contract with the New York City Department of Education by conditioning enrollment in its pre-K program on families registering for its fee-based after-school program. So in layman's terms, that means Rainbow Child told all of the parents and families or guardians that were going
to enroll their student in this pre-K program that they could only do so if they also enrolled in a fee base and/or a program you had to pay for, for after school. In September 2023, the DOE placed the vendor on a three-year CAP, or a corrective action plan, with an option to extend it if the vendor did not adhere to the requirements of the CAP. As of April 2026, so two months ago, Rainbow addressed and improved its enrollment practices and has been compliant with the terms of the CAP.
Additionally, DOE does not anticipate a need for extending the CAP based on the vendor's good standing. Again, this is not a responsible vendor. This is a vendor who's currently being held accountable. Mm-hmm. Those are not the same thing. The decision to condition enrollment on registration in a fee-based after-school program came from who? Who made that decision? Was that administration? Was that just a single person at the district office? Was that the after-school provider saying that they would pull their program?
There's not enough information here for me. I know. And it's frustrating, again, that the DOE has determined this vendor to be responsible, because those are not the same thing. No. And also, if the program is supposed to be free, conditioning it on paying for a feed program is offensive, and they should not be allowed to get more public dollars because you attempted to price gouge. You attempted to add a fee to something that should not have a fee and purposely does not have a fee associated with it. It's so frustrating. Anyway. I wish I was able to talk about that.
All right, so we're going to go to the next one. Mm-hmm. All right, so agenda item 19, is the 407B extension library bid to trade folks. Am I on the right one? Let me see. Mm-hmm. We're good. And the estimated highest amount is $32,000 and 77, um, $32,077.50.
The estimated total amount is $64,155. The funding source. There are three funding sources there. We have, the contract is not retroactive. The contract term is two years. The contract type is, it says requirements. The vendors' names are listed. Let's see what the purpose, and then we're going to get into discussion. So the purpose, of course, is to request authorization on behalf of the Office of Library Services to extend its contract with the vendor detailed below
for provision of library book materials to participate in New York City schools and non-public schools. The extension for which authorization is being requested will be funded by individual schools and offices. So in the discussion, the vendor was awarded a five-year contract in 2014 to request for bids to supply the DOE with library books and processing with unique class identified below. The purpose for the original bid was to establish cost-effective contracts
and provide, NYC DOE end users with the option to acquire a wide selection of library books and processing. Wait, for $32,000? Yeah. It's for all of the parts and pieces that make it possible for the library to function, kids to be able to take out books and- Yeah ... and all that. Okay. So the process includes, not limited to, automation kits. That's the barcodes on the spines. The machine-readable cataloging, or the acronym for it is call mark, and that's for the records.
That's to catalog their records. Property labels and theft detection tags. And then the request for bids strategically aggregated the DOE's buying power to secure the lowest cost, best value for pre-bound library books and processing, increase school user satisfaction, expand the use of tools that support electronic ordering, invoices, and payment, and to build and improve supplier relationships. Cool. In accordance to the contractual language, the DOE exercised both
its two one-year renewal options and then extended the contracts for additional five years through September 30th, Pursuant of the sections of the procurement policies and procedures, additional two-year 407B is requested as is necessary to avoid lapse in services and to allow the time to complete a new solicitation and for transition from incumbents to any
new provider. Hmm. The Chancellor's committee on contracts recommended extending the below-name contract on April 7, 2026. Okay. The vendor details are there. Vendor responsibility. Looks like they're in good standing. Do want to mention the estimated expenditure for extension is $64,155. This amount was determined based on the total of expenditure for two years under the reference contract. During periods when the contract was not active, not contracted, purchase orders were issued due
to a lapse in contract or delayed contract registration, which prevented schools from placing orders under the active contract. Therefore, the estimate also includes non-contracted spending to ensure sufficient capacity for schools to procure library materials during the extension period. Additionally, this vendor has agreed to a most favored customer clause, which requires the vendor to offer DOEs the lowest prices for
subject materials of any prices offered to any vendor, other customers, for the same materials. Okay. All right. So we save the money. Mm-hmm. Okay. Still kind of low for books, but I'll take it. Yeah. But this is for processing and records. Correct. Okay. Got that. Okay. And it's not like every single one of the DOE schools has a functioning- Absolutely ... library that can sustain students checking out books. All right. We got about three more agenda items to go. So we have the agenda item 20, request authorization to extend various contracted vendors to provide trade book
materials. There is the highest annual amount. There's the estimated total amount. Contract term is for two years. It is not retroactive. The vendors' names are listed below. Nothing kind of sticks out there. The purpose is for the DOE to request authorization on behalf of the division enterprise purchasing to extend its contracts with various vendors, detailed below, for the provision of trade book materials to participating New York City public schools and non-public schools. Okay.
Any discussion with that? Mm-mm. I feel like the next three, or rather the next two- Yeah ... this one and the- It's pretty much the same ... authorization to extend it are like- Yeah ... necessary minutia contracts. But we need to extend and... Cool. Like trade book materials? Yeah. Yeah. That seems like a very niche provider- Absolutely ... situation. And there are no issues with any of those- No issues ... which is fantastic. Yeah. If we could get some vendors with no issues for other services, that'd be great, too. Yes. All right. We're going to move on to the next agenda item. Coming to the close. Request for authorization to extend contracts
with control technologies for repair and maintenance of direct digital control systems. Okay. Getting into the technology. All right. So we have the estimated annual amount, the estimated total amount. We have the contract term, and we have the vendors' names. We have the purpose, which the DOE requests authorization on behalf of the Division of School Facilities to extend its contract with control technologies for inspection, maintenance, calibration, testing, repair, replacement of all equipment. This includes the HVAC system in the
schools and administrative buildings, and the current contract expired on October 25th, 2025. This extension will be funded by the DSF. Any discussion, Erin? No, I just want to note that it says that the replacement RFP was released in November '24. No award was made due to an administrative error, not anything having to do with- With them ... them or their performance. Because as you'll know, in the vendor responsibility, there is nothing. So they didn't get that extension because of COVID-
Yes ... not because of them. Well. All right, agenda item 22. Request to... This is the scholarship programs in support of special education and teaching, clinical disciplines, and for related services. There's the estimated highest amount, estimated total amount, the contract term. There are the requirements. Here are the vendors. I'm scrolling through. Okay, so let's talk about the purpose. The purpose, to request authorization on behalf of the DOE's Division of Human Resources to extend agreements with the institution of higher education listed below
for scholarship programs in support of special education and teaching and clinical disciplines, as well as related services. Federal and state laws require that students with disabilities be evaluated for services provided with appropriate instructional and clinical services within the acceptable timeframe. The DOE, on behalf of the DHR, issued an open-ended request for proposal to contract with colleges and
universities to provide teacher certification programs for eligible teachers, candidates via New York State accredited doctorate and master degree programs. Okay. An open-ended request for proposal was determined to be the best alternative to a competitive sealed bid, as this allowed for evaluation of qualitative differences among various pedagogical programs. Okay,
cool. And this is similar to the contract that we saw earlier, where these individuals come from a college or university that offers master and doctoral degree-level programs. And they note that the clinical services, I guess, are two components, each of which provides candidates with instruction and clinical services required by law to work in New York City public schools. So this, again, is another help the teacher help the community situation, I think.
That's right. The only vendor responsibility noted is a sexual harassment lawsuit. Here it is. DOE is aware of the following information regarding Touro University from July 2020 to September '21. Numerous news articles revealed lawsuits against Touro, formerly known as Touro College, related to allegations of sexual misconduct and breach of contract. In December '21, Touro entered into a non-monetary settlement and was released from all claims related to allegations of sexual misconduct.
Separately, in January 26th, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a judgment in favor of Touro regarding the alleged breach of contract, and both matters are now closed. Hmm. Fordham University has a few here. From '21 to present, multiple investigations were conducted by various government agencies, including the United States Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, or OCR, the US Equal Opportunity Commission, or EEOC, New York State's Division of Human Rights, NYSDHR, and the United
States Department of Education, the New York City Commission on Human Rights, NYCCHR, and the New York City Department of Buildings, DOB. The vendor advised that there is one OCR investigation, that's the Office for Civil Rights, related to disability discrimination complaint, which is now closed. There are a total of six New York State Department of Human Rights investigations related to discrimination of housing, race, color, age, military status, or disability, of which one is closed, two withdrawn, two dismissed, and one is pending.
There are seven EEOC investigations, EEOC is the US Equal Opportunity Commission, related to age, sex, race, color, national origin discrimination complaints. There is a United States Department of Education investigation related to Section 117 of the Higher Ed Act. I'm not sure what that is. The matter is closed. One NYCCHR, which is the New York City Commission on Human Rights investigation related to disability discrimination, which has been closed for administrative cause with no corrective action required,
and one DOB boiler violation, which was dismissed. Hmm. Fordham's got some issues. I see. Okay. And then the last one is a logistics contract. Last one is a logistic contract. It is estimated highest amount, $1,555,596. There's the estimated total amount. I'll have to get that number. But there's the contract term. Let's go down to the purpose, which requests authorization on behalf of the Office of Food and Nutritional Services to extend the contract
with WDS Logistics, two to five vehicles, personnel to assist with transporting non-food items such as paper goods and the like. And the vendor may also be required to transport furniture, equipment, and food items. Discussion, award five-year term contract. We're going to scroll down. Are there any vendor responsibilities? Yeah. There was? Yeah, they have violated California labor laws. The California labor laws, I think, are a bit stricter than New York- Yes ... labor laws. So that is going to do it for
our review of the contract committee. And because of time, we are going to get ready to adjourn. So we're going to be discussing planning a set meeting for the next contracts committee meeting for the month of July. But I would like to thank for all the attendees, and I would like to thank all of the people that will be listening or even watching the recording. This information is very important to dissect this so that we can all get an understanding about where the money's going and also how we vote, and it gives perspective.
So thank you so much. I'm going to adjourn the meeting, and have a great night. Thank you