Cambridge committee reviews out-of-school-time expansion study, highlights inclusion and staffing gaps

The Cambridge Human Services and Veterans Committee on Wednesday reviewed the city’s out‑of‑school time (OST) expansion study and heard updates from Department of Human Services staff and the Agenda for Children on enrollment, inclusion supports and next steps for expanding access.

The committee heard that the DHSP lottery placed 1,528 children from 1,843 applicants this year, with nearly 90% of applicants receiving an offer and 80% receiving their first choice; the department said the lottery prioritized low‑income families and that offer rates for low‑income applicants were about 93%. Committee members and presenters emphasized progress since the expansion study was released in May while identifying remaining barriers: recruiting and retaining staff for one‑to‑one supports, finishing assessments for children with higher special‑education needs, and negotiating more consistent space‑sharing agreements with schools and community providers.

Why it matters: After‑school seats provide childcare stability that supports family employment, student attendance and social‑emotional learning, presenters and councilors said. The committee framed the expansion work as a system change effort that requires coordination across the Department of Human Services (DHSP), Cambridge Public Schools (CPS), and community providers coordinated by the Agenda for Children.

Michelle Farnham, assistant director for children, youth and families at the Department of Human Services, said the lottery “is accomplishing what we set out to accomplish” while acknowledging remaining gaps. Farnham provided the committee with the lottery totals: 1,843 applicants, 1,528 placements and a waiting pool of 193 at the time of the presentation. She noted the waiting pool has fallen from 518 in August 2023 and 334 at the same time last year.

Kari Milner and Susan Richards, co‑directors of the Agenda for Children, reviewed the expansion study’s recommendations, which the report grouped under five focus areas: building system partnerships, equity and enrollment, shared space, supports for students with special needs, and a stronger OST workforce. Milner said nationally “parents are self reporting affordability, accessibility, and availability as three major factors” and pointed to Cambridge data showing better—but still imperfect—access compared with state and national averages.

On students with special needs, Farnham and Agenda for Children staff said the city has an inclusion initiative but continues to identify children who require additional supports. Farnham said 21.3% of lottery applicants self‑reported an IEP or a 504 plan, a share similar to the school district’s special‑education population. Of the roughly 347 children identified through the assessment process, 175 were placed immediately, about 108 received supports before school started, and an initial group of 64 required deeper assessment; that unresolved group had fallen to 57 at the time of the committee presentation. Farnham said staff expect to be able to place about 20 of the remaining 57 soon, and that roughly 37 still require additional staffing or further assessment to determine appropriate placement.

Farnham described the DHSP inclusion initiative staffing: “Our inclusion initiative in DHSP is a mighty three full‑time people,” and the department was interviewing for a fourth full‑time position. She added the department currently employs about 10–11 part‑time one‑to‑one aides and said the system would benefit from roughly 20 additional part‑time one‑to‑one staff to meet demand.

Agenda for Children leaders said space is a recurring constraint for expansion. Susan Richards described pilots of more formalized shared‑space agreements in several school buildings and summer building coordinators who served as points of contact for multiple providers. The presenters urged continued coordination with CPS facilities staff and principals to address storage, cafeteria access and daily handovers between school day and after‑school programs.

Workforce stability and career pathways were a second recurring theme. Agenda for Children staff and councilors discussed models that combine day‑time and after‑school roles to increase full‑time opportunities and retention, and an apprenticeship model being pursued at the state level that the presenters hope to adapt for Cambridge. Richards said the city has added about 20 full‑time front‑line DHSP positions in recent years and that the nonprofit sector also employs many full‑time frontline workers, but turnover remains a challenge.

Presenters and councilors also discussed programs that serve students with very high needs, such as Camp Rainbow, which operates in summer months; several councilors asked what would be necessary to provide a similar model during the school year. Richards and Farnham said such a program is feasible in scale (they cited summer program sizes of roughly 25–35 children) and that building a school‑year model would require explicit planning on space, staffing and funding.

Committee members asked about tuition and affordability. Farnham said DHSP uses a sliding fee scale based on income; families at the lowest fee tier pay as little as $11 per month, and the highest non‑subsidized monthly rate for a full‑time site is about $764. She said the city’s scholarship funding for nonprofit providers—previously supported with ARPA and now included in the city budget—covered 91 scholarship seats among the six nonprofit 5‑day‑a‑week programs referenced in the study.

Next steps: presenters said action teams will carry the expansion study’s recommendations into implementation this school year, with Agenda for Children and DHSP staff coordinating pilots on shared space, inclusion supports and workforce pathways. The Agenda for Children maintains a public project page and will post ongoing progress and action‑team updates, presenters said.

No substantive policy vote on the expansion study was taken by the committee at the meeting; the committee took a procedural roll‑call vote to adjourn at the end of the session.