Board tables I-Ready data-sharing and two purchase items after members raise procurement and privacy concerns

The New Haven Board of Education on May 12 tabled a memorandum of understanding with I-Ready and two purchase orders after members raised questions about vendor selection, multiyear commitments and student-data risk.

Board members said the items were not time-sensitive and asked for further information about cost comparisons and data protections before approving contracts.

Board member Wilcox moved to approve several purchase orders but members subsequently asked to remove items 6.4 and 6.5 and to postpone action on MOU 4.01 with I-Ready. “If I ask for the information, I rightfully deserve it,” said Miss Downer, who repeatedly requested direct pricing from Microsoft and additional detail on multiyear contract terms. She said using a third party for licensing increases risk to students’ personal information.

District staff explained that some vendors were recommended to allow licensing to be turned on and off as needs change; staff also said initial vendor relationships are often one-year to evaluate performance. Chris Brown, a district staff member who discussed vendor selection during the meeting, was noted by a board member as having his salary paid by the city rather than the school side.

The board voted to table procurement items 6.4 and 6.5. The motion to table carried with recorded yes votes from Miss Downer, Mister Wilcox, Doctor Benitez, Mister Juarez, Miss Colon, Maya Elicker and the meeting chair.

Separately, the board voted to table MOU 4.01 (the I-Ready data-sharing agreement) so the finance committee and board members could review the district’s data-sharing policy and privacy safeguards; the motion to table also carried unanimously.

After tabling those items, the board approved the remaining three memorandums of understanding, four amendments, four purchase orders and one contract; Doctor Benitez recorded an abstention on that combined approval.

Board discussion showed concern about multiyear commitments during tight budgetary times and about whether the district had pursued the lowest-cost route by contracting directly with vendors such as Microsoft. Members asked staff to return with direct-vendor pricing, clearer justification for third-party intermediaries and more information about data privacy and contract terms before items are considered again.