Plymouth School Committee Explores Outsourcing Food Service Administration
District considers contracting administrative oversight of cafeterias; transportation study reveals potential for significant cost increases when current bus contract expires
PLYMOUTH - July 7 - The Plymouth School Committee voted Monday to explore contracting out administrative oversight of food services for the upcoming school year while simultaneously posting for a food services director position to evaluate both options.
The proposal would not affect current food service employees, who would remain as valued employees of Plymouth Public Schools under existing contracts. The approach solely involves contracting for administrative oversight.
"This approach would solely involve contracting for administrative oversight with our goal of strengthening our efficiency, our compliance, operational supports in what is really an increasingly complex and regulated area," Campbell said during the July 7 meeting.
The district issued a Request for Proposals that remains open until July 29 at noon. If a vendor recommendation emerges from the screening process, the committee plans to schedule a brief meeting by Aug. 4 to conduct an official vote.
School Business Administrator Adam Blaisdell noted that several local districts already use food service management companies, including Duxbury, Bridgewater, Raynham, Weymouth, Rockland, Randolph, Brockton, Norton, Norwood, Bourne, Fairhaven, Somerset, Berkeley and Rehoboth.
"One of the things that we don't necessarily have the capability to do is really the food inventory as well as we had hoped to kind of keep track of what's coming in the door and out the door," Blaisdell said, explaining potential benefits of contracting with companies that have better inventory tracking mechanisms.
Committee member Paul Samargedlis emphasized the importance of making decisions based on long-term benefits rather than recent incidents. "We want this to be a decision that isn't just a knee jerk reaction to something that occurred," Samargedlis said. "We want it to make sense for the long term, regardless of any scenario."
The RFP specifies an initial one-year contract that can be extended, similar to option years in transportation contracts, providing flexibility if the arrangement doesn't work as expected.
Separately, the committee received a transportation study from the Massachusetts Association of Pupil Transportation that reveals concerning cost trends for when Plymouth's current contract expires in two years.
The study found that recent contract openings in nearby districts have resulted in significant increases. Hudson approved a contract with First Student that was 51% over the previous year's rates, while Bedford Public Schools saw an 8.2% increase and Dartmouth experienced a 26% increase over prior transportation costs.
"Some of the increases that Richard had talked about with that range are really being seen around here and in Western Mass as well," Blaisdell said, referencing a previous report.
The study examined Plymouth's yellow bus operations, finding an overall average ride time of 40 minutes with buses operating at about 51% capacity. Elementary schools average 41 minutes with 56% capacity, middle school routes average 35 minutes at 51% capacity, and high school routes average 43 minutes with 46% capacity.
The study identified several issues including bus delays primarily after school, discipline concerns, and timeliness problems. It suggested the district could consider taking transportation operations in-house but noted significant factors that must be weighed, including financial costs, employee benefits, management liability, vehicle purchasing or leasing, salaries for technicians, and bus parking locations.
"Taking over buses is significant. It's not something that we could make the decision today and have it go into effect," Blaisdell said. "This would be a year or two-year process in order to get it fully implemented and do it right."
The study recommended going out to bid early to help make final decisions, noting that early bidding could provide information to determine potential savings from taking operations in-house or continuing to contract services.
Campbell also reported significant uncertainty regarding federal education funding for the upcoming fiscal year. The Office of Management and Budget has delayed release of key formula funds under the Every Student Succeeds Act, putting several grant programs on hold.
Delayed programs include Title IIa for professional development ($2.2 billion nationally), Title IIIa for English learner education ($890 million), Title IVa for student support and academic enrichment ($1.3 billion), and Title IVb for 21st century community learning centers ($1.4 billion).
"While this leaves us in a great deal of uncertainty, what seems clear right now is these grant programs will at the very least be delayed this year," Campbell said.
The state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has advised superintendents to develop contingency plans for the possibility that districts will not receive these federal awards for fiscal year 2026.
The committee also approved new job descriptions for Board Certified Behavior Analysts, updating outdated descriptions to reflect the district's growing team of seven or eight BCBAs. The updated descriptions distinguish between BCBAs with teaching licenses who contribute to the Massachusetts Teachers' Retirement System and those without teaching licenses who contribute to town retirement.
The district's fiscal year 2025 fundraising report shows schools raised just under $458,000 with a net of about $261,000, representing a 62.5% return on investment for various student activities, trips and programs.
Committee members received updates on state funding increases, including a $497 million increase in Chapter 70 aid statewide and increased minimum per-pupil aid from $30 to $150 for fiscal year 2026.