Madison County board presses for signed MOU before continuing North Florida Child Development services

MADISON, Aug. 25 — School board members at a Madison County School Board workshop on Aug. 25 reviewed proposed and prior memoranda of understanding (MOU) with North Florida Child Development and directed staff to obtain a signed agreement from the agency before the district proceeds with further actions tied to the MOU.

Board members and staff examined three documents — the 2023–24 agreement, the 2024–25 agreement and a proposed 2025–26 agreement — asking for line-by-line changes and clarifications about which services North Florida would pay for. District staff described negotiated items that included transportation, two bus monitors, and continued payment for meals. Staff said the district could not locate a signed prior-year agreement and that North Florida had not yet provided required signatures or payments tied to earlier arrangements.

The lack of a returned, signed agreement was central to the discussion; district staff said the documents on file were drafts and that the district should require a returned signature before taking further financial actions. Board members raised concerns about continuing to provide transportation and other services while the agency had not completed the formal sign-off. Staff presented budget figures for the proposed MOU that showed a district in-kind contribution and a proposed MOU line-item budget that staff said would be “just under $88,000,” while the district’s tally of in-kind contributions — staff time, facility costs and utilities — was discussed as roughly in the mid‑$90,000s. Board members and staff cautioned that those figures were based on draft documents and email summaries and that some numbers were not final.

The parties also discussed enrollment and slot counts tied to the program. Staff reported the program currently has 37 slots at the Madison location; the 17 slots previously associated with Greenville were described as not filled and not currently being used by North Florida. Board members and district staff said they had offered an additional classroom to accommodate slots but had not received clear confirmation from North Florida about Greenville‑area enrollment.

On transportation, staff said the district proposed asking North Florida to reimburse the cost of two bus monitors (salary plus fringe benefits) rather than pay for drivers, buses or fuel. Board members noted insurance and fleet issues: one bus in the district fleet is handicap‑equipped and another is a 55‑passenger vehicle that staff said was not large enough for regular fleet deployment. Staff also said the district cannot claim full‑time‑equivalent (FTE) funding for children unless they are enrolled in the district’s student information system (Skyward) and legally rostered as district students.

Rather than approve the draft MOU or continue expanded services immediately, the board directed staff to request a signed agreement from North Florida’s board and the signed agreement from the prior year before the district would vote to approve or to continue certain services tied to the MOU. District staff said they would return the paperwork to North Florida, ask that organization’s governing board to approve and return the documents, and then bring the item back to the district board for formal action. The board asked for an update at its Sept. 16 meeting and agreed to revisit transportation authorization at the next scheduled meeting pending receipt of the signed agreement.

Board members also discussed operational details that would affect implementation: whether students from North Florida could be dual‑enrolled or require full enrollment by parents to be counted for district FTE, how bus insurance riders would be enacted to cover non‑district students riding district buses, and how the district would handle monitoring and safety responsibilities if it continued to provide transportation and on‑site services without a signed contract. Several board members emphasized they did not want to punish children by abruptly ending pickup or services, but they also said the district needed formal, signed commitments from the partner agency to protect district finances and comply with audit requirements.

Next steps identified by the board included: staff formally requesting and documenting a signed MOU from North Florida Child Development (including any prior signed agreement the district could not locate), obtaining a response from North Florida’s board, and returning the item to the Madison County School Board for action. The board agreed to revisit transportation authorization at the next meeting if a signed agreement was provided.