Cuyahoga Falls superintendent proposes bringing preschool in‑house; board asks for deeper financials

Cuyahoga Falls City Schools Superintendent Andrea Solico proposed on Oct. 23 that the district withdraw preschool services from a regional consortium and operate those classrooms directly, arguing early childhood programs improve long‑term outcomes and could expand access to general‑education preschool seats.

"We have been working, for a couple of years now talking about preschool," Solico told the board, pointing to research and local partnerships as motivation for the change. District materials presented at the meeting estimate models that would keep the current special‑needs integrated classrooms while adding one or two general‑education classroom cohorts — roughly 36 additional general‑education seats in some scenarios — depending on enrollment.

The presentation laid out preliminary finances comparing the consortium daily rates with the in‑house model and noted state preschool funding figures shown in the materials (a $3.80 line item was cited in staff materials as part of the funding offsets). Staff also provided an illustrative tuition reference of about $480 under a 180‑day model, framed as a notional example rather than a final price.

Board members pressed staff for more concrete backup: how many students currently enroll through the Educational Service Center (ESC), the precise per‑day and per‑student cost calculations, benefits/contingency assumptions, and whether preschool busing would be provided (staff clarified busing for general‑education preschool would not be included in the base offering). One board speaker noted the district’s overall budget is tight and said they "would need to know a lot more information before I would feel comfortable moving forward with it." Staff committed to returning with more detailed enrollment surveys, salary basis for preschool teachers, and clearer projections.

Treasurer and finance staff flagged consortium billing as an area of financial unpredictability. Meeting discussion referenced historical ESC costs that varied widely from district to district (presenters cited a past range in local examples from about $700,000 to roughly $1.2 million), reinforcing the board’s request for itemized backup and comparisons.

Staff also addressed operational issues that would affect cost and roll‑out timing: classroom licensing, space constraints at the suggested site (the preschool wing at the Chanay/Chenaine facility), potential needs for itinerant special‑education staff, and how sliding‑scale tuition or fee waivers could be used to increase access for low‑income families. Presenters said vouchers, sliding scales and fee‑waiver mechanisms exist and would be part of later proposals.

No formal vote was taken on the preschool plan. District staff will produce a more detailed financial and operational package, including enrollment modelling, staffing and salary assumptions, the proposed tuition/fee‑waiver approach, and an itemized comparison to the current ESC charges for the board to review at a future meeting.