Emotions run high at meeting on after-school program

By Alice Waugh

Faced with the possibility that the Lincoln Extended-day After-school Program (LEAP) might be replaced, parents and others turned out in force to protest at last week’s meeting of the School Committee, which voted to delay the decision until the fall.

At issue was the five-year lease for Hartwell Pod C, which LEAP has occupied for about 17 years (the current lease expires on June 30). By state law, the School Committee, which controls that space, must put out to bid any expenditure over $25,000. In 2008, LEAP was the only bidder, but this time around, Springboard Education in America also submitted a proposal.

In a report to Superintendent of Schools Becky McFall dated April 23, Creel said that in evaluating the two proposals, “significant differences in scores were observed in the areas of staff training and experience, description of program to be offered and proposed program fee structure.” Based on a weighted scoring system on evaluation criteria, LEAP got a score of 69.9 while Springboard got 91.1. Springboard also bested LEAP on price, proposing to pay rent of $31,000 a year while LEAP offered $28,000 (the minimum set by the School Committee).

A three-member selection committee recommended that the School Committee vote at its May 2 meeting to award the contract to Springboard—a possibility that mobilized parents, LEAP teachers and others to come to the meeting.

But before any of the attendees could speak, Creel said he recently realized there was an “ambiguity” in the wording of the request for proposals that was published in March. Specifically, the RFP did not state that the Lincoln Recreation Department would occupy Pod C during the summer for the Lincoln Summer Day Camp as it has done for many years.

Because there’s not enough time between now and the end of June to rewrite the RFP and repeat the bidding and selection process, Creel recommended that LEAP’s tenure be extended for one year, as permitted by a clause in its lease. Meanwhile, the RFP will be rewritten and published some time in the fall.

Also, even if the School Committee had voted to award the contract to Springboard, “I don’t see how they could realistically be expected to hire the staff and bring the program up to speed” by the time school starts in the fall, Creel added. The School Committee eventually unanimously voted to postpone the process and allow LEAP to stay for the 2013-14 school year.

This outcome did not sit well with Brett Prilick, executive director of Springboard for America. “I did think this was a real process,” he said before the vote. “What I see is that we went through a lot of time, energy, effort and resources in a situation that was sold to us as something other than it was. With this type of mentality, I see LEAP being here another 30 years.”

Prilick argued that Springboard would provide more than LEAP does, with licensed teachers and offerings including robotics, rocketry, band and orchestra. “After-school programming has changed in the last 30 years,” and Springboard’s program is more of a “supplement to the school day” that could result in higher MCAS scores, better attendance, and improved fitness and development of social skills, he said.

“You really need to take a look at what you saw in that proposal and what you decided on,” a visibly angry Prilick said. “I think it’s great you came up with a technicality, but you can only do that for so long. If you want people to come to your school district, competition is the only thing that’s going to get you where you want to be. I think you guys need to take a hard look at how this decision was made. Your children would’ve gotten more—now they will not. I feel sorry for the children.” Prilick apologized later in the meeting.

Among the parents who spoke on behalf of LEAP was Sharon Lincoln, an attorney who researched Springboard and said she found “anomalies” in its proposal, which “seemed to stretch or perhaps cover over certain deficiencies.” There are ambiguities about when Springboard Education for America and the nonprofit Springboard Foundation were founded and how they are organized, Lincoln said. Springboard Education for America appears to be a for-profit enterprise, but nonprofit organizations are “highly regulated by the attorney general of Massachusetts and the IRS” and “highly transparent,” which should be a key factor for the School Committee, she said.

The possibility of choosing a for-profit company was “shocking to me,” said resident Julie Lynch. “Perhaps we should look at McDonald’s to fulfill our school lunch program.” Her son Patrick, a LEAP attendee, sat with Lynch and started to speak as well, but was overcome with emotion.

Several parents expressed dismay that the School Committee did not seek parent and community input before last week’s meeting. “From our perspective, the process appeared very closed and very much of a surprise,” a resident said.

Four high school seniors from Lincoln who went through LEAP—Callie Flanagan, Hailey Rosenblatt, Maryrachel Durso and Rebecca Kupperstein—spoke as a group. “They were our teachers and now they’re our friends,” Flanagan said of the staff. “They taught us things about life and not just about school.”

“The love and care that my daughter gets at LEAP is priceless. You can’t measure that,” said resident Jennifer Coon, a child psychologist. LEAP “is a really unusual place and Lincoln is an unusual town. I hope they can do a better job with their proposal next year.”