May 28, 2026 Council Budget Hearing.
This is the single most consequential hearing in the campaign. DYCD's own testimony defines the questions parents are now asking.
What DYCD told the Council
- Admission 1
Parents were not part of provider selection.
DYCD acknowledged on the record that parents were not part of the actual provider-selection process. Stakeholder sessions shaped the model; they did not pick who got which school.
- Admission 2
Slot continuity, not provider continuity.
DYCD framed the priority as continuity of funded slots — not continuity of the provider, staff, or programming families had built relationships with.
- Admission 3
Provider diversity was an explicit goal.
DYCD discussed provider diversity as a stated objective of the rebid. Families are asking why expansion to new schools was not used to bring in new providers without disrupting working ecosystems.
- Admission 4
Principal rankings were collected — but not always followed.
DYCD confirmed principals submitted rankings as part of the process. The school-by-school crosswalk showing where awards matched or diverged from those rankings has not been released.
- Admission 5
12 schools were left with no award.
DYCD acknowledged that twelve schools came out of the process with no afterschool award at all. The plan for those schools — and the children in them — has not been published.
- Admission 6
Licensing transitions are still pending.
DYCD discussed the licensing transitions new providers will need to complete. Contract registration, DOE space agreements, and DOH licensing remain open questions for sites changing operators.
- Admission 7
The Commissioner's 'resilience' comment.
Asked about the impact on children losing trusted programs, the Commissioner suggested children would be resilient. Telling kids to adapt is not a transition plan.