Tell me about Lafayette's aftercare program

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CLS costs about 2x as much as the other aftercare program at Murch -- what are they charging at Lafayette?

I was a LAP board member and the cost was very affordable. LAP was a nonprofit so parents weren't paying for the overhead of some larger for-profit company. So sorry it has to dissolve now but get that school has a big need for more aftercare slots.

CLS will charge $280/month.
Lap was $221.

I'ts a jump, but $280 is still well within the norm-- isn't murch $305?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CLS costs about 2x as much as the other aftercare program at Murch -- what are they charging at Lafayette?

I was a LAP board member and the cost was very affordable. LAP was a nonprofit so parents weren't paying for the overhead of some larger for-profit company. So sorry it has to dissolve now but get that school has a big need for more aftercare slots.

CLS will charge $280/month.
Lap was $221.

I'ts a jump, but $280 is still well within the norm-- isn't murch $305?

Plus $50 a month for "electives," including the language classes that they were chosen for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CLS costs about 2x as much as the other aftercare program at Murch -- what are they charging at Lafayette?

I was a LAP board member and the cost was very affordable. LAP was a nonprofit so parents weren't paying for the overhead of some larger for-profit company. So sorry it has to dissolve now but get that school has a big need for more aftercare slots.

CLS will charge $280/month.
Lap was $221.

I'ts a jump, but $280 is still well within the norm-- isn't murch $305?

Plus $50 a month for "electives," including the language classes that they were chosen for.

Gee, that still sounds a lot cheaper than the nearly $500 a month I pay to another neighborhood provider, with no electives at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It generally is: assuming it's for an extended period of time and enforceable.

I guess use could be at her ongoing discretion but that would open the provider to a ton of risk.

It works like this: the principal signs the building use agreement- and each family has a contract with the provider. That's how it works and how it worked with LAP. DCPS signs only the building use agreement- the rest is parent-to-provider.

Not necessarily. It depends on the provider. https://dcps.dc.gov/afterschool
Some providers have more formal agreements with DCPS than just a building use agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the new provider CLS the Capital Language Services that currently operates out of St. Pauls and serves 50-100 Murch kids? No way are they equipped to run a 300 kid program especially with no oversight.

Yes, same provider. Who provides oversight at Murch?

Murch has XDay and CLS. Word is the two programs are competing for space in the new school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm very pleased that the school will better be able to meet demand for aftercare with the new provider, and... also hope the LAP Board re-writes its bylaws so it can still continue to serve the school. Rumor has it that they have some stash of money and they could use it to help offset the families who do have financial need (yes, even Lafayette has a few families who may qualify), give bonuses or specialized training to staff, bring ins special programs...

LAP is stashing money or the HSA is stashing money? Aren't they both non-profit organizations with accountability?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And I wouldn't want the existing LAP program to govern a contract on behalf of the school.

Agreed! Lack of oversight, and their last-minute punt to another company when they realized that Dr B was actually really serious about serving more students and families - it's really a shame, but definitely for the best. Even if it costs the families who have historically been part of the program more for aftercare then they're used to paying. It's a LOT less for families who've had to hire sitters/nannies/do other creative things.

Is using a provider with a strong HR capability punting when a program is asked to promise to add over 20 staff members by next August? What if CLS is not successful at hiring for next year? Do they have any past performance with regards to putting in place a program that size in any other DCPS schools? What assurances are there that they will be able to do it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very pleased that the school will better be able to meet demand for aftercare with the new provider, and... also hope the LAP Board re-writes its bylaws so it can still continue to serve the school. Rumor has it that they have some stash of money and they could use it to help offset the families who do have financial need (yes, even Lafayette has a few families who may qualify), give bonuses or specialized training to staff, bring ins special programs...

LAP is stashing money or the HSA is stashing money? Aren't they both non-profit organizations with accountability?

There is no relationship between LAP and HSA.

[Anonymous]

Lafayette wasnt much of a worrier over what would happen AFTER, he was more of a "take this horse by the reigns" here and now kind of guy who could apply his practical, tactical brilliance in the moment and was in afraid to step in to even the worst quagmires but wasn't always thinking about what would happen AFTER his bold actions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting since there are other home-grown afterschool programs that can have 300+ kids, and that the parent board (after 40 years) just decided to disband rather than figure out how to scale up.

Yes, it's too bad LAP fought so hard against change and growth instead of figuring out how to serve the school community with the existing program. The transition is going to be tough. It would have been easier if LAP had focused its efforts on coming up with a solution for growth during the last year or more.

They didn't fight against change and growth. They were happy to grow, but needed things like space in the school (you can't have 300 kids in the cafeteria). Dr. B was unwilling to provide that this year and so set them up to fail.

That's BS. They were told they could have anything but the gym, which is used for other stuff. They wanted their own dedicated space -- they didn't want to have to share.

Should we ask the LAP Board to provide meeting minutes? I bet they could.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It generally is: assuming it's for an extended period of time and enforceable.

I guess use could be at her ongoing discretion but that would open the provider to a ton of risk.

It works like this: the principal signs the building use agreement- and each family has a contract with the provider. That's how it works and how it worked with LAP. DCPS signs only the building use agreement- the rest is parent-to-provider.

Not necessarily. It depends on the provider. https://dcps.dc.gov/afterschool
Some providers have more formal agreements with DCPS than just a building use agreement.

Those are only the Title 1 schools for which DCPS provides aftercare. Not an option to WOTP schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting since there are other home-grown afterschool programs that can have 300+ kids, and that the parent board (after 40 years) just decided to disband rather than figure out how to scale up.

Yes, it's too bad LAP fought so hard against change and growth instead of figuring out how to serve the school community with the existing program. The transition is going to be tough. It would have been easier if LAP had focused its efforts on coming up with a solution for growth during the last year or more.

They didn't fight against change and growth. They were happy to grow, but needed things like space in the school (you can't have 300 kids in the cafeteria). Dr. B was unwilling to provide that this year and so set them up to fail.

That's BS. They were told they could have anything but the gym, which is used for other stuff. They wanted their own dedicated space -- they didn't want to have to share.

Should we ask the LAP Board to provide meeting minutes? I bet they could.

To what end? It won't change anything, registration has already started for the new provider. The ship has sailed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lafayette wasnt much of a worrier over what would happen AFTER, he was more of a "take this horse by the reigns" here and now kind of guy who could apply his practical, tactical brilliance in the moment and was in afraid to step in to even the worst quagmires but wasn't always thinking about what would happen AFTER his bold actions.

Good implied analogy/metaphor for Dr. B!

On the one hand I commend her for taking on LAP's can't do attitude on this. On the other hand I'm disappointed about the long term consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting since there are other home-grown afterschool programs that can have 300+ kids, and that the parent board (after 40 years) just decided to disband rather than figure out how to scale up.

Yes, it's too bad LAP fought so hard against change and growth instead of figuring out how to serve the school community with the existing program. The transition is going to be tough. It would have been easier if LAP had focused its efforts on coming up with a solution for growth during the last year or more.

They didn't fight against change and growth. They were happy to grow, but needed things like space in the school (you can't have 300 kids in the cafeteria). Dr. B was unwilling to provide that this year and so set them up to fail.

That's BS. They were told they could have anything but the gym, which is used for other stuff. They wanted their own dedicated space -- they didn't want to have to share.

Should we ask the LAP Board to provide meeting minutes? I bet they could.

To what end? It won't change anything, registration has already started for the new provider. The ship has sailed.

I'm more interested in seeing minutes from the ASAT meetings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very pleased that the school will better be able to meet demand for aftercare with the new provider, and... also hope the LAP Board re-writes its bylaws so it can still continue to serve the school. Rumor has it that they have some stash of money and they could use it to help offset the families who do have financial need (yes, even Lafayette has a few families who may qualify), give bonuses or specialized training to staff, bring ins special programs...

LAP is stashing money or the HSA is stashing money? Aren't they both non-profit organizations with accountability?

There is no relationship between LAP and HSA.

What is the HSA's relationship with CLS? Isn't CLS offering a discount to families that also sign up for FLEX? Isn't FLEX the provider that the HSA contracted with this year to provide LEP? Wasn't LEP historically run by a parent-volunteer? Does anyone know what happened to that parent volunteer this year? There seems to be a pattern here.