What DYCD must release.

Without this, no one outside DYCD can confirm who was displaced where. Every other claim depends on it.

Principals were permitted to express preferences. DYCD has not shown which schools ranked the incumbent first.

When the awardee differs from the principal's ranking, the public record needs the written rationale.

PPB rules require competitive scoring. Categories, weights, and totals must be publicly inspectable.

DYCD's defense relied on this concept. The public has not seen how it was operationalized.

Procurement integrity is verifiable only when challenge outcomes are public.

Continuity of service depends on whether seats and dollars actually transfer.

Some awardees are smaller orgs. Capacity to run a city-funded program at scale must be documented before September.

Adult continuity is the difference between a program and a placeholder. Families need named transition leads.

DOE and DYCD share these buildings. Written agreements show whether the school actually consented.

Access is a federal civil-rights obligation, not an add-on. Plans must exist before transition, not after a complaint.

Working families need notice in writing, in their language, before the first day.

A six-year, hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars award cannot be audited from a press statement.

Who scored these proposals, what youth-development or school experience they had, and how DYCD chose them.

Including how reviewers were told to treat prior site-specific performance and whether incumbent experience was treated as bias.

Were substantially similar proposals scored differently by different readers? Without variance analysis, the rubric is unverifiable.

If parent or provider feedback shaped scoring, the public needs the instrument, the response rate, and the scoring methodology.

If awardees may subcontract a large share of programming, the public needs to see the rule and ask why a functioning integrated provider was removed at all.