Analysis shows bringing custodial services in-house would raise costs by roughly $1.66 million annually; committee asks staff for lower-cost scenarios

Facilities staff presented the results of a preliminary cost analysis Feb. 11 for returning school-custodial services from contractor ABM to in-house district employees. The analysis focused on wages, benefits, equipment purchases and other initial and recurring costs.

What the study found: The facilities director recommended a living-wage hourly rate of $21.11 and estimated a need for about 35 full-time custodial positions (compared with the contractor's current on-site staffing of 31). Using those inputs and standard fringe-benefit assumptions, the district estimated a recurring annual in-house staffing cost roughly $1.66 million higher than the current ABM contract budget (current ABM budget for custodial services and related settlement obligations is approximately $1.9 million).

Start-up and recurring costs: The analysis included a one-time equipment and setup cost of about $412,000 to purchase floor scrubbers, extractors, vacuums and other equipment currently owned by the contractor. Initial consumables and uniforms were estimated at about $180,000 and $5,000 respectively. The facilities director estimated overtime and substitute coverage (for events, snow, weekends and vacancies) at roughly $225,000 annually; together with salaries and benefits the total projected first-year cost was about $3.56 million, with a subsequent-year recurring cost of about $3.15 million.

Contract limitations and workforce issues: Administrators noted the ABM contract contains no-compete and transition clauses that limit the district's immediate ability to hire some on-site ABM employees. The presentation also noted ABM's reported turnover and that ABM employees on site are often paid substantially below the $21.11 recommended living wage (the district estimated many ABM custodians earn roughly $15—$16 per hour).

Board response and requested follow-ups: Committee members asked staff to return with alternative cost scenarios, including an apples-to-apples comparison using 31 staff instead of 35 and a lower hourly-rate scenario (the board requested a scenario using $15.50 per hour, 31 employees, and a clearer split of overtime costs that are paid by external user groups versus district-paid overtime). The committee also asked administration to check union/contract details for ABM on no-hire clauses and to confirm the timeline and notice provisions in the ABM contract (90-day notice clauses were cited).

Next steps: Administration will provide revised cost scenarios and more detailed breakdowns of event overtime, the ABM contract terms, and implications for the district if it chooses to pursue bringing custodial services in-house.