Custodial services RFP: Bay City ISD hears AHI presentation as board weighs possible contract

The Bay City ISD board on April 9 held an informational budget workshop segment on a request for proposals (RFP) for custodial services and heard a presentation from AHI, the RFP’s recommended vendor. No contract decision was made; trustees were told the item could come to the board agenda for possible action at the April 15 meeting to meet the RFP timeline.

AHI representatives, including Luke Grimes, vice president of business development, and Paul Riojas, vice president of operations, described the company as a woman‑owned national firm that specializes in K–12 and higher‑education custodial services. Grimes said AHI is SIMS‑certified, does not subcontract (all employees would be W‑2 hires), and offers ongoing training, benefits and a structured quality‑control program. "Our people are the most important part of our company," Grimes said, noting employee promotion pathways and in‑house training.

District staff and trustees framed the presentation as an informational step rather than a commitment. Dr. Mac (district administration) told the board the RFP process has legal parameters and an established timeline; staff recommended consideration at the April 15 meeting so the district can meet commitments in the RFP. Brent (district staff) and other staff said the RFP committee completed interviews and that AHI emerged as the top proposer under confidential scoring criteria.

Community members and district employees asked detailed questions about job security, continuity of campus relationships, wages and transition plans. An attendee who identified herself as a local resident and longtime teacher emphasized the custodians’ relationships with students and urged the board to ensure current district custodians would be retained. In response, Grimes said AHI intends to interview all current custodians and "give every employee that you have the opportunity to come on board." He added that AHI would typically staff accounts with full‑time employees, maintain staff through the summer and provide project managers and quality‑control visits.

District staff said the price proposals were “very close” and that the decision should weigh quality of service, training, benefits and staff retention in addition to bottom‑line cost. Staff also noted AHI’s equipment plans, preventive maintenance partnerships for machinery and trimester business reviews with campus stakeholders.

Nut graf: The presentation and Q&A underscored two tensions in the procurement: (1) cost comparisons between in‑house and contracted custodial models are narrow in this RFP, and (2) the board and community are focused on staff continuity, training and campus relationships. AHI offered town‑hall meetings and guaranteed interviews for current custodians to reduce transition anxiety.

Questions remaining include final price comparisons, contract length and cost‑escalation terms. AHI representatives said multi‑year contracts typically run three years and equipment investments are amortized across that term; they said they would negotiate price‑control provisions with the district if selected. Staff said a final contract could appear on the April 15 board agenda for approval, denial or tabling.

Ending: The board took no action April 9 and directed staff to continue the procurement timeline; trustees asked staff to share detailed cost comparisons, projected transition steps and plans to preserve custodians’ relationships with campuses before any vote.