Proviso 209 staff recommend extending First Student bus contract while requiring on-time guarantees, discounts and new ridership tracking

Proviso Township High Schools District 209 staff presented a proposal to extend the optional fourth and fifth years of a five-year transportation contract with First Student, asking the board of education committee of the whole to discuss service guarantees, discount terms and improved ridership tracking.

The district said First Student currently charges $228.75 per AM route for Proviso East, Proviso West and Madison Academy runs and has proposed a 3.5% increase. Presentation materials shown to the committee listed a $239.94 per-route charge for 2025–26 in a column labeled “7 routes or less” and an adjusted per-route figure of $236.76 for networks with more than seven routes; 2026–27 rates in the packet were shown as roughly $248.00 (≤7 routes) or about $245.00 (>7 routes). District staff said Proviso operates far more than seven routes: 19 routes at Proviso West, 16 at Proviso East and eight at Madison Academy as presented to the board.

Why it matters: Transportation is a major operating cost for the district and school start times and activity routes directly affect student access and participation. Board discussion focused on whether to keep First Student — the district’s sole contractor for the service since the state approval — negotiate changes, or go back out to bid.

What staff proposed and the district’s conditions: Staff emphasized several service-quality requirements they negotiated with First Student and recommended be written into an extension if the board approves one. Key provisions described to the committee included: - On-time guarantees tied to financial penalties: the vendor would guarantee on-time arrival for routes and provide discounts if routes are late; delays of 20 minutes or more would qualify for a 75% discount in some circumstances as described by staff. - Clarified fault vs. force majeure: the presentation distinguished delays caused by vendor staffing or equipment problems (for which the vendor would be liable) from delays caused by extraordinary circumstances such as severe weather or trains blocking routes. Staff said some train-related delays at Proviso West are not attributable to the vendor and would not automatically trigger discounts. - Evening activity runs: a requirement that after-school/activity drop-offs end earlier (staff said evening activity runs were arriving as late as 4:30 p.m. last year and that the district negotiated returns around 3:30 p.m. for some runs). - Supervisor and maintenance oversight: supervisors would provide fuel/inspection reports and ensure drivers follow safety procedures.

Data, accountability and ridership: Board members repeatedly pressed staff on measurement and documentation. Staff said the district did not have a unified, searchable record of last year’s route problems and discounts but that the district is establishing a new incident-reporting form and a monthly review cadence tied to invoicing and discounts. Staff also said nightly PowerSchool data feeds are now sent to First Student so routing is more automated than in prior years, and staff proposed piloting student badging and improved nightly data exchanges to capture seasonality and daily ridership.

Board questions and concerns: Board members asked how ridership would be counted, whether families should be asked to “opt in” for bus service on the registration form, and whether the district can require daily head counts or badge scans. District staff replied they are building procedures and data collection tools; they cautioned that ridership is seasonal and can vary substantially with weather and families’ weekly schedules, so any opt-in policy must allow flexibility.

Contract strategy and price rationale: Staff told the committee First Student offered a 3.5% increase, which staff said is substantially lower than escalations other districts are seeing (staff said comparable districts were seeing double-digit increases), and that about 3.3 percentage points of the requested increase reflects salary pressures. Staff recommended the district consider exercising the two optional years rather than going to bid immediately, citing continuity of service and the district’s ability to negotiate service guarantees and monitoring procedures. Staff said they will return with updated board memos as the proposal is refined.

Outcome: The item was presented for discussion; there was no formal board vote recorded in the committee transcript. Staff said they will bring more detailed documentation and recommended contract language back to the board.