Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Financial Consultant topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District staff recommend one-year contract with Illuminate Financial Consulting over higher-cost alternative
Summary
Staff presented two financial-consulting proposals — one from Illuminate Financial Consulting (recommended) and a higher-cost offering from Frontline (formerly PMA/Forecast5). Staff recommended the one-year Illuminate agreement at an annual cost of $24,000; no formal board action was taken at this meeting.
District staff reviewed two proposals for long-term financial forecasting and analytics and recommended the Board of Education approve an agreement with Illuminate Financial Consulting for one year at a cost shown in the presentation as $24,000. No formal vote was taken at this committee meeting.
According to the presentation, Illuminate Financial Consulting (identified in the slides and by staff as associated with Dr. Robert Grossi) proposed monthly board reports, budget and tax-levy assistance, and forecasting and projection reports. Staff described a second proposal from Frontline (described in the presentation as the vendor that acquired Forecast5/PMA), which included additional student-analytics modules and location analytics; staff said the Frontline package was priced in the presentation at $106,920 and that many of its modules are sold as add-ons.
Staff told the board that Illuminate’s proposal covered the district’s near-term needs at a substantially lower annual cost, and that Grossi has prior experience working with school districts statewide. Board members asked questions about the scope of Frontline products and whether the district currently uses other Frontline modules. Staff said the district uses several Frontline products, although not necessarily the HR modules discussed in the presentation.
Staff recommended approval of Illuminate’s proposal to provide a second set of eyes on the district’s long-term financial projections and to assist with regular board reporting. The recommendation is for a one-year agreement beginning July 6, 2026. Staff characterized the comparison as a cost–benefit choice between a targeted, lower-cost consultant and a broader, higher-cost product suite. There was no formal motion or vote recorded; staff indicated this item would be brought forward as an action item for the board to consider.
