Robla School District trustees and staff held a public workshop to review the district’s request for proposal (RFP) process for after‑school and expanded learning programs after staff recommended six vendors for board consideration. The superintendent told the assembled parents and staff that the district had received 26 proposals and that no board action would be taken at the workshop.

The meeting focused on how the district decided to issue an RFP after the California Department of Education changed implementation under Proposition 28 so that an ACES (After‑School Education and Safety) grant must now be awarded directly to school districts rather than to outside agencies. The superintendent said, “We will be offering after school programming next year,” and explained that the ACES award for 2025–26 is about $753,000 and that ELOP (Expanded Learning Opportunities Program) funding for the district is roughly in the millions, together approaching the $4,000,000 range discussed in the workshop.

Why it matters: the grants fund program slots at five district schools and set staffing, attendance and reporting requirements. Community members urged that decisions about who operates those programs include parents, teachers and students; they said long‑standing providers such as the START program and the Roberts Family Development Center have deep ties to families and children with special needs and should be evaluated with that context in mind.

The workshop covered the RFP timeline (posted March 24, due April 14), the evaluation rubric used by a multi‑staff committee, and the next steps if the board accepts staff’s recommendation. The superintendent described the rubric’s six scoring areas — program needs, high‑quality program elements, program evaluation, program design, professional development and program funding — and explained operational requirements such as daily attendance reporting and staff fingerprinting for anyone working with students.

Parents pressed several specific concerns: that the RFP and committee selection process happened quickly; that parents and teachers were not represented on the scoring committee; that providers’ ability to support students with IEPs and 504 plans was not clearly described; and that the district did not have a formal evaluation process for current providers. One parent, Angelina Espar, said, “I strongly agree that, you know, the start program continue being there,” citing START’s familiarity with students’ medical and behavioral needs.

Staff and trustees responded that pulling the item from the prior board agenda was done so the district could take public feedback into account; the superintendent said, “The removal of that item from the agenda was the fact was because you were heard.” Staff also said the committee’s scoring produced the top six recommendations but that the board had not approved any contracts and could amend recommendations or require additional steps such as presentations or interviews.

Legal and procurement constraints were raised repeatedly by staff: any change that would advantage or disadvantage particular applicants risks a challenge unless the district opens the same opportunity to all proposers. The superintendent said she would seek legal guidance about rescoring, reopening proposals or extending current contracts, and noted the next board meeting (May 8 on the district calendar) as the near‑term timeline the board could use to consider options.

The workshop ended without formal action. Trustees and staff said they heard parents’ requests for more stakeholder involvement (parents, teachers, student voice), clearer evaluation metrics for providers, and more time or a revised process for vendor review. The district listed possible next steps: require presentations and interviews of recommended vendors; broaden the committee for future RFPs to include parents and teachers; and obtain legal advice about how to proceed while preserving a fair, transparent procurement process.