School Committee Candidates Discuss Outsourcing Custodians

Welcome to Meet the School Committee Candidates: each day this week we'll post a question and an answer from each of the candidates regarding their run for a seat on the School Committee. Don't forget to check out .

Nick DeSilvio is running for a second term on the committee while Barbara Skaar is running for the seat as a write-in candidate.

Many parents and community members this year criticized the School Committee's decision to outsource custodial services, which are now provided by Aramark. Mr. DeSilvio, do you stand by the decision you made, and why? Ms. Skaar, if you were on the committee at the time, how would you have voted and why?

DeSilvio: I voted in favor of the superintendent's recommendation to the school committee to outsource custodial services and although the transition has been bumpy, I share the administration and Aramark's commitment to making this a success. We have seen Aramark step up and make additional investments in resources to remedy the shortfalls in service and address staff and parent concerns. 

Most importantly, the revenue savings has given the administration the opportunity to increase AP classes at the high school, reduce class sizes in the elementary schools, and accelerate the deployment of new technology to the entire district. These are much needed resources that would not have been possible without this change.

The decision to outsource the custodial services was a difficult one to make, since personal relationships were involved. However, an effective school committee member needs to put aside personal bias and have the courage to make the difficult decisions that are in the best interest of the school district. I have the courage to make these decisions.

Skaar:  To be clear, I was not a member of the School Committee when the decision to out-source our custodial services was made. However, I can address the process I would have taken to reach a decision.  First, I would have thoroughly researched the cost-savings- how much money will actually being saved after calculation of expenses, such as unemployment claims.  We were told the savings would be $500,000.00 per year. The actual savings is far less. 

I would have required and reviewed proposed metrics and milestones.  How long will it take to ensure the contracted services are successfully delivered?  What methods are in place for oversight and review?  I would have made certain that key performance indicators were part of the contract negotiation. This would have included quality control checks of randomly determined locations. Are the facilities clean?  Has the staff been adequately trained?  Is the staff ready and available at after-hours events? In addition, I would have required that a sliding performance scale, an industry standard practice, was part of any contract so that compensation would be based on performance.  Consequently, a failure to perform the contracted service results in reduced compensation.  Review of the performance would be on a monthly basis. 

As it currently stands, we are told that full compliance and performance will require 18 months.  In the meantime, we are paying for a decline in our previous service level.  Furthermore, we are not saving the $500,000.00 per year we were promised.  This is unacceptable.