Council Member Marte Questions Discontinuation of Manhattan Youth

Um, can the agency provide the city council with a list of current school-based providers who did not um get awards a newer RFP, a list of school-based programs who did not get awarded the new RFP with the old funded um amount lines, um, a list of non-viable center-based providers, and a list of DYCD um funding groups for both center-based and school-based awards and their amounts.

You don't have to go through it if you guys can just get back to us.

Yes, we can spot it from.

Um I have a lot of questions, but I'm gonna pass it off.

I I do I didn't even get to any of the other sections, so I'll be back.

So thank you.

She will be back for round two.

Okay.

Um so we're gonna move to council member questions.

Uh councilmember Maloney, followed by Deputy Speaker.

Thank you.

Um, on behalf of countless parents and principals across my district, and you're gonna be hearing from other districts in Manhattan.

I have concerns about the new Compass RFP and in particular Manhattan Youth, which was discontinued at some schools but not all schools, with limited transparency about why and limited engagement with the parents and the principals on the ground to council member Stevens's point earlier.

This is a program that had a 94% attendance rate, positive audits, and was recommended uh first by many principals.

So the question is why why were they deemed insufficient?

And if their program truly was insufficient, then why were they awarded for some contracts and not others, including a case where there's a co-located school where uh Manhattan Youth was awarded for one school and not the other?

And I think we get to say that you know, I want to speak more broadly about the selection process, and I'm gonna hand it over to Dana.

But I do want to talk about this in terms of transparency and the narratives that are out there.

This was a procurement process that was highly transparent.

The concept paper was co-developed by the field.

And there, in any procurement, there are winners and non-winners.

And my heart goes out to all of the agencies that were not awarded.

But I am really proud of the rigorous process that we engaged in and the level of care that DYCD took in making these awards.

I could I I want to speak about that, uh, but I also want to give you the technical answer, which I'm gonna hand over to Dana.

And I also want to say that every single competition in every single region was competing with other providers.

And so they were ranked in that geographical area accordingly.

So there were some providers that in some areas they were rewarded, awarded their specific, uh they were re awarded, and in other areas they were not.

And and I can tell you on the provider side that that is as someone who's been a provider that is devastating, and yet it is part of the procurement process.

I think the thing I want to highlight, because this has not been procured for over 10 years, there is a sense of ownership that I think is really felt in terms of relationships, in terms of continuity, and yet what we know to be true is that procurement is necessary because it allows for innovation, for equity, and for accountability.

So I think more than one thing could be true about this process, but again, I I share the deep uh empathy and regard for the staff for the families and the children youth that uh that are going to have a new provider.