Board approves Green Education contract amid state funding and rate questions
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Trustees voted 6–1 to contract with Green Education for literacy and academic support after debate about funding sources and a state notice flagging the contractor's per‑day rate; Green and trustees described the services as beyond standard tutoring.
The Flint Board of Education approved a contract with Green Education (Action Item 25.2) after an extended discussion about the scope of services and funding. The vote was 6 yes to 1 no.
Trustees raised concerns based on state correspondence that highlighted the contractor’s proposed daily rate. One trustee said the figure cited by the state was “about 140 times greater than the national average rate for tutors,” and urged fiscal caution and exploration of alternative funding sources before committing multi‑year general‑fund expenditures. Trustee King voted no, citing those concerns.
Mr. Green, who joined the meeting online to answer questions, challenged the characterization of his organization as a conventional tutoring vendor. “That’s not what we’re… The district asked for support for students and also for teachers and administrators,” he said, explaining Green Education’s model combines direct student intervention with intensive teacher and leadership development aimed at system‑level change.
Superintendent Jones and several trustees expressed support for implementing the services quickly. One trustee noted previous site visits and outcomes in Mississippi and urged the district to “put our best foot forward.” At least one trustee asked staff to clarify whether Title funds or other restricted sources could cover the services rather than the general fund.
Administrators said due diligence on funding is ongoing; the superintendent indicated the team had begun work to respond to state questions about rates and funding expectations. The approved contract is structured as a one‑year pilot with potential renewal contingent on performance and funding decisions, per the contractor’s and district’s remarks during the meeting.
The board asked staff to return with clear funding plans and any state guidance required to ensure the contract’s compliance with grant rules before the district expands obligations beyond the initial pilot period.